A Study in Masculinity: The Representation of Masculinity in 19th Century Popular British Fiction

(1)

A Study in Masculinity: The

Representation of Masculinity in

19th Century Popular British

Fiction

Zahia Siab (10471006)

June 30, 2016

Master Thesis

Credits: 18 ECTS

Literary Studies: Literature and Culture (English) Faculty of Humanities

University of Amsterdam

Supervisor

Jochem Riesthuis English Language and Culture

(2)

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my thesis supervisor, Jochem Riesthuis, for helping me narrow down the focus for this thesis, and for making my transition between the Sciences and the Humanities that much easier. I also want to thank my Mum and my sister, Khadijah, for always encouraging and supporting me, particularly when I felt that I couldn’t finish what I’d started. Thank you for lending a patient ear when I wanted to bounce off ideas or when I needed to rant in frustration - I made it, in the end. Finally, I express my utmost gratitude to Timmie, my island of calm when the stress of this massive project got too much. Thank you for all the pizzas and the pep talks, and for making the final product look amazing!

(3)

Abstract

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells were prominent novelists in the late 19th cen-tury. Their novels heavily incorporated aspects of science in order to portray the scientific method of late 19th _{century society, with the explicit purpose of both relating it to the}

wider scientific community, and to also show a new scientific, progressive, and superior representation of masculinity. This thesis, therefore, provides an analysis of the male protagonists with respects to their manipulation of the scientific method and the sub-sequent effect this has on their masculinity. Doyle’s creation, Sherlock Holmes, shows himself to be a heroic and enlightened masculine figure through his use of chemistry and deductive science. Holmes’ companion, Doctor John Watson, is also a strong masculine figure, although notably less superior than Holmes. Instead, Watson relies on his medical knowledge and marriage to elevate his masculinity. Wells’ novel, The Island of Doctor Moreau, showcases the varying masculinities of Doctor Moreau and Edward Prendick. Moreau’s vivisection science and his attempts to manipulate evolution, demonstrate his capacity as a superior and progressive man. Prendick, on the other hand, is significantly less masculine. He is constantly afraid and is kept as a prisoner by Moreau. It is only when he escapes from Moreau’s compound that he redeems himself as a masculine char-acter, albeit still not as masculine as Moreau.

KEYWORDS: Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, H. G. Wells, Masculinity, Science, 19thCentury, Sherlock Holmes, The Island of Doctor Moreau .

(4)

Introduction

In line with the rapid development of scientific discovery and invention of their period, late 19th century novelists, most notably Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells, presented fictional scientists in their narratives. Their male protagonists are shown to be superior, rational, and heroic in their ability to manipulate science, which they often do for their own interests. At the same time, there is a shift, in the fiction, from the representation of man as primitive and brutish, to the intellectual, scientific, progressive man. Therefore, this thesis aims to argue that in the novels of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells, there is a clear association between this new representation of masculinity and scientific progress, suggesting that science did not just impact economics or the order of society, but that it specifically impacted the representation of masculinity in 19th century popular British fiction.

In this thesis, I will analyse specific novels and short stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells, amassing to five primary sources in total. For each, I will identify how science impacts the representation of masculinity in the protagonists of the story. However, I will also observe some secondary characters in more detail in order to highlight the particular ways in which they engage with the theme of science, and to ascertain any differences between them and the protagonist. For example, in Doyle’s oeuvre, the character of Sherlock Holmes plays a significant role in the story. Nonetheless, it is also valuable to the purpose of this study to also observe the ways in which Holmes’ companion, Dr John Watson, uses the scientific method. Through practising medicine, Watson is also a man of science, yet his relationship with science differs greatly from Holmes’. Holmes is much more calculating and pragmatic in his endeavours to use science as a tool to solve crimes. On the other hand, as a trained medical professional, Watson’s approach to science involves more emotion, thus perhaps limiting his masculinity, especially when compared to that of Holmes.

(6)

main critical theories: masculinity theory as a subsection of gender studies, and new historicism. New historicism promotes the merging of historical study with literary study. It acknowledges that historical periods and the historical literary text influenced each other, rather than literature just reflecting the history of the period in which it was written. New historicism, therefore, emphasises the idea that “literary texts influence the sociohistorical world that influences the literary texts, so that the textuality of history and the historicity of texts shape and reshape each other in a continuous cycle of mutual influence” (Parker 246). Since the term was first coined by Stephen Greenblatt (Parker 247), I will be using Greenblatt’s theories as a point of reference throughout this thesis. Greenblatt’s idea behind the establishing of new criticism as a critical method involved placing the “literary text within the ‘frame’ of a non-literary text” (Barry 167) which then allows both texts to be read in context of each other. Within the context of this thesis, the fiction of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells are to be read in the frame of scientific development in 19th century Britain, and the ways in which this influenced masculinity. Thus, the masculinity presented in these works is both influenced by the time in which it was written, Victorian Britain, and has also heavily influenced the representations of masculinity in this period. Even though Greenblatt’s main research centres on the works of William Shakespeare and other English Renaissance literature, his initial development of new criticism as a literary theory is highly applicable to this thesis’ discussion on 19th_{century popular British fiction, and the impact the scientific themes within these novels had}

on society at the time.

In addition to Greenblatt, I will also be using gender studies, and in particular, masculinity theory, to better argue my points relating to the ways in which science emphasises the masculinity of the protagonists in the fiction of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells. Looking at gender studies, and, more specifically, at ideas propagated by Judith Butler, an understanding can be drawn between the subject of identity and masculinity. Gender studies, itself, “tries to go beyond the binary oppositions and essentialism” (Parker 180) that is typically associated with genders, i.e the binary of male vs female. Butler discusses the perception of identity as a “constant switching among a range of different roles and positions, drawn from a kind of limitless data bank of potentialities” (Barry 139). This suggests that masculinity, as a type of identity, is “performed” (Parker 184) rather than being “a static essence” (Parker 184), and that many different elements within an identity can fluctuate and change. An example of this can be seen in the way that masculinity will be used in this thesis. In the late 19th century, masculinity experienced a movement from the representation of man as brutish and primitive, to man as rational, progressive, and, more specifically, scientific. In this sense, masculinity, as an identity, is not “a static essence” (Parker 184). Much of Butler’s theories surround the idea that “models of gender, sexuality, and identity” (Parker 184) are linked to culture, and that this “surrounding culture often forces or pressures those models on its members” (Parker 184). This means that individuals have no real say in the way that they are effected by the

(7)

social norms within their culture, thus they are also subjected to the representations of identity that are supported by their society. For the purpose of this thesis, masculinity in the late 19th century will be explored. Hence, the ways in which masculinity was portrayed by Victorian society will also be analysed. In particular, a focus will be made on the ways in which Doyle and Wells represent the masculinity of their protagonists in their novels, again highlighting that their work was both subject to this portrayal of masculinity, as well as also influencing the representation of masculinity during the Victorian era.

The works of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and H. G. Wells present different forms of scientific masculin-ity, which directly reflect the ideas surrounding masculinity in the late 19th _{century in that they}

represented a shift from the brutish, primitive man to the enlightened, heroic one. At the same time, the protagonists within these works also provided examples for the men in the Victorian era, thereby helping in the portrayal of masculinity at the time. This is perhaps particularly apparent in Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories. Amy Griswold and Joseph Kestner, for example, discuss the signif-icance of Holmes’ masculinity in the late 19th_{century. Griswold points out that “British youth were}

encouraged to develop a masculinity that emulated Holmes’s” (7) because he “highlighted the pos-itive results of masculine qualities such as hardiness, adventuresomeness, and a value for empirical evidence” (8). This therefore emphasises the traits that Victorian men were encouraged to possess because they were considered significant masculine attributes. Griswold also suggests that Holmes “represents...masculinity because of his scientific approach to crime solving. He is a hunter in truth, but his tools are more sophisticated that those of his predecessors” (7). Here, she alludes to the idea that perceptions of masculinity changed in the late 19th century, and that Holmes represented the “Victorian ideals of masculinity” (Griswold 9) which was that of a scientific, knowledgeable man rather than a barbaric and cruel one. Kestner also highlights the importance of Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories during the Victorian era, stating that “they endorsed qualities which were radically gendered as masculine in Victorian culture: observation, rationalism, facticity, logic, comradeship, pluck, and daring” (77). These attributes, then, are also crucial to understanding how masculinity was regarded in the late 19th _{century. Kestner also points out that “the construction of}

masculin-ity in these...texts was an element of their appeal to the predominately male readers of the Strand magazine” (76), suggesting that not only did the stories demonstrate popular notions of masculinity, but they also served as examples for their male readership. Thus, the writings of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and also of H. G. Wells, are noteworthy in how they address the perception of late 19th century masculinity, both because they were influenced by these perceptions, and also because they had an impact on the way in which masculinity was represented.

In the first chapter of this thesis, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories about the famous detective, Sherlock Holmes, will be studied. In particular, two of his novels: A Study in Scarlet and The

(8)

Sign of Four, as well as two collections of short stories: The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes and The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes. These texts contain a range of detective stories that portray the protagonist, Sherlock Holmes, as a man of science using scientific method in tandem with his powers of deduction and observational skills. Holmes is subsequently set up as the more dominant and more progressive man within these. This is contrasted with the characters in the London police force, for example Inspector Lestrade, who is shown to be less intelligent and more prone to violence. However, saying that, Holmes is also identified as a capable fighter: “...an expert singlestick player, boxer, and swordsman” (Doyle, “A Study in Scarlet” 20). Even though these traits are often associated with the brutish, less developed man, in Holmes they are encouraged and do not detract from his role as an intellectual. In this respect, Doyle emphasises Holmes as both an enlightened masculine figure, but also as a physically enabled one. Holmes’ companion and foil character, Doctor John Watson, is also a man of science, and thus he is also established as a progressive man, although less advanced than Holmes. He is portrayed as a more emotional and caring man. Since the Sherlock Holmes novels are primarily detective stories, it is important to realise that the science in these novels are used as a tool to solve crimes. The science is not the main focal point of the story, unlike in the novels of H. G. Wells for example. Instead, the manipulation of science aids in the understanding of the crimes which act as the central point of the story. Additionally, Doyle also uses scientific progress to emphasise a new form of masculinity; one that is heroic and progressive rather than primitive.

In the second chapter of this thesis, the works of H. G. Wells will be analysed. For the purpose of this thesis, one of Wells’ most iconic and influential works has been selected: The Island of Doctor Moreau. This text represents a significant part of the science fiction canon since a majority of the themes within the novel are based on science. Because of this, Wells is often referred to as the father of science fiction literature (Corba). Wells was greatly interested in the study of biology, and he was an advocator of Charles Darwin’s theories, such as those on evolution. Therefore, many of Wells’ novels possess a central theme of biology. As well as this, Wells was also an outspoken socialist, and this is also often a theme that can be found within his novels. Wells’ novel The Island of Doctor Moreau, published in 1896, predominately deals with these themes of evolution and biology. However, the novel discusses the manipulation and corruption of evolution. Doctor Moreau abuses his scientific knowledge to create humanised beings from animals using vivisection. This complete disregard for natural laws within the field of science culminates in Doctor Moreau paying the ultimate price: his life. Wells therefore plays with the scientific concept of evolution and biology in order to reiterate the importance of natural laws and their significance in maintaining a balanced ecosystem. Thus, although Doctor Moreau is seen to initially epitomise masculinity, in that he exerts total control over the island, his death emphasises the outcome that awaits those who abuse their power. The novel itself is narrated by Edward Prendick, who finds himself shipwrecked on Moreau’s island.

(9)

The interaction between Moreau and Prendick provides an interesting insight into the representation of masculinity, since it is clear that Moreau enforces dominance over Prendick as soon as he reaches the island. As the novel develops however, Prendick starts to rebel against Moreau’s iron fist of power, and tensions are created between the two characters. Although Moreau’s use of the scientific method within the novel sets him up as the superior being on the island, Prendick’s defiance of Moreau’s dominance allows him to establish himself as a more rational and informed man.

(10)

Chapter 2

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

“Holmes was certainly not a difficult man to live with. He was quiet in his ways, and his habits were regular...Sometimes he spent his day at the chemical laboratory, sometimes in the dissecting-rooms, and occasionally in long walks...Nothing could exceed his energy when the working fit was upon him...” (Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 17)

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was born in Edinburgh, Scotland in 1859. Doyle studied medicine at the University of Edinburgh. It was at university that he discovered a fascination for “chemistry, drugs, and the laboratory” (Gerber 4). This interest was soon to provide the foundations for Doyle’s literary career. Doyle’s inspiration for Holmes’ character came about through his interaction with one of his medical school teachers, Joseph Bell. In his book entitled Chemistry and Crime, Samuel Gerber discusses the connection between Bell and the fictional Holmes, pointing out that much of Holmes’ observational methods were based on similar methods used by Bell, stating that these methods were to “become the touchstone, the magic of Sherlock Holmes” (Gerber 5). Doyle himself was also extremely observant, using techniques that he had learnt from his time studying under Bell. Gerber mentions that “little ever escaped the young medical student turned writer” (13). Doyle practiced medicine for many years, even owning his own medical practice where his skills of observation were extremely useful when diagnosing patients. Unfortunately, his practice was not very successful. This, however, allowed him to concentrate on producing fiction. Doyle’s two main protagonists in his detective series, Sherlock Holmes and his companion Dr John Watson, can be seen to possess several elements in common with their creator. For example, even though Holmes is based on Joseph Bell, his knowledge of chemistry, his lab work, and his deductive skills create associations to Doyle. In addition, Doyle and Watson share a profession. In some way, Doyle’s medical knowledge allowed him to accurately describe the ways in which Watson dealt with medical

(11)

emergencies within the stories. Hence, it is clear to see that Doyle was very much influenced by his own life when creating his detective fiction.

Doyle introduced Sherlock Holmes in the Strand Magazine, a monthly periodical which contained “high- quality illustrations, fiction, interviews with the famous or the interesting, and factual articles that appealed to the readership” (Booth 140). Doyle’s motivations for publishing in the Strand Magazine were because he realised that he could “gain a dedicated readership and build up a reputation for himself” (Booth 141) if he published his Sherlock Holmes stories in just one periodical. In the late 19th_{century, then, Holmes’ popularity was well established, so much so that when Doyle}

decided to cease writing about the nation’s favourite detective, there was public outrage. In the story The Final Problem, Holmes is killed at the Reichenbach Falls by his arch nemesis, Professor James Moriarty. However, fans of this quirky and unconventional detective urged Doyle to continue writing the Holmes stories. In his biography of Doyle, The Doctor, the Detective and Arthur Conan Doyle, Martin Booth mentions that Doyle suffered “occasional threats of readers, the nagging of editors and the offers of near-bribes by publishers” (243) to bring back Sherlock Holmes. In 1897, Doyle decided to “write a Holmes play to mollify them all” (Booth 243) but this play was not meant as a means to resurrect Holmes. However, due to its massive popularity, Doyle was forced, by popular demand, to literally bring Holmes back from the dead. In 1901, Doyle published the first episode of The Hound of the Baskervilles in the Strand Magazine. This was received extremely well by the public, and encouraged Doyle to produce more narratives with Holmes as the protagonist. Holmes’ popularity was extremely significant to the established thoughts and ideas surrounding masculinity in the late 19th century. Through his creation of Holmes, Doyle was able to provide an example of masculinity to his Victorian male readership, which was particularly important at such a time of political turmoil and war. Even 86 years after his death, Doyle’s work continues to illustrate examples of Victorian masculinity as it is constantly being adapted and expanded, both on the screen and in literary format, allowing Holmes to live on in the 21st _century.

2.1 Science and Sherlock Holmes

2.1.1 Holmes as a man of science

In his article, Sherlock Holmes in a Chemistry Class, published in the Journal of Chemical Education, Ken Shaw discusses Holmes’ scientific prowess, particularly as a chemist. He brings Holmes’ chemical education to light by quoting a passage from Doyle’s Abbey Grange story in The Return of Sherlock Holmes collection: “I must admit, Watson, that you have some power of selection which atones for much which I deplore in your narratives. Your fatal habit of looking at everything from the

(12)

point of view of a story instead of as a scientific exercise has ruined what might have been an instructive and even classical series of demonstrations.” (Shaw 372). Shaw argues that Holmes is “perhaps peeved that his chemistry is not as well-known and admired as his crime solving” (372) since Watson seems to be more preoccupied with the narrative surrounding the crime itself, rather than the actual scientific aspects that have gone into solving it. For Holmes, science is necessary in order to understand how the crime was committed, and then to work out who committed it. As if to reiterate this, Shaw mentions that “it was A. C. Doyle who pointed out that the first chemical test for blood on fabric was in fact developed by the fictional sleuth himself!” (372). Shaw is referring to a passage in Doyle’s A Study in Scarlet, in which Holmes demonstrates to Watson a new forensic blood test that he has invented:

The old guaiacum test was very clumsy and uncertain. So is the microscopic examination for blood corpuscles. The latter is valueless if the stains are a few hours old. Now, this appears to act as well whether the blood is old or new. Had this test been invented, there are hundreds of men now walking the earth who would long ago have paid the penalty of their crimes. (Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 14)

Through this new technique, Holmes exhibits his role as a man of science who has created a way of improving forensics to allow for the more efficient capture of criminals. Through the phrase “clumsy and uncertain”, Holmes is alluding to the forensic techniques of old. His new blood test is more competent and accurate, thus establishing himself, and his invention, as the new alternative within the realm of crime solving. Considering that this discussion takes place in the first chapter of the first novel, it is an extremely significant moment for the way that readers perceive Holmes’ character. Holmes’ use of science here not only establishes him as an intelligent character, but also emphasises his abilities as a detective. According to Shaw, “Holmes allows us to be excused for not recognising the scientific value of his work” (2011) because readers, and Watson, still ultimately acknowledge his ability to solve the crime, regardless of the way in which he has done so. It can be argued that Watson’s lack of understanding of Holmes’ instructive scientific exercises creates a power dynamic between the two characters, in which Holmes is seen to be more masculine than Watson because he has the ability to manipulate the natural sciences. An example of this can be seen in A Study in Scarlet when Watson meets Holmes for the first time:

“You have been in Afghanistan, I perceive.”

“How on earth did you know that?” I asked in astonishment.

(13)

Watson’s use of the word “astonishment” indicates the level of surprise that he feels surrounding Holmes’ ability to work out such a personal detail based on just one glance. In this instance, Holmes has just met Watson and yet he has seemingly been able to deduce such a unique aspect of Watson’s past. This immediately sets up the power dynamic between the two men, with Holmes being the more masculine due to his skills of observation. At this point in the narrative, Holmes knows more about Watson then Watson knows about Holmes, and that, therefore, places him in a position of power. Based on this deduction alone, and the fact that Holmes chuckles to himself, readers can also assume that Holmes is probably aware of more than he lets on. Hence, he demonstrates his masculinity through his deductive reasoning, and therefore through his ability to successfully use scientific methods.

2.1.2 Holmes’ deductive abilities

The scientific methods that Holmes utilises in the stories are often remarked upon and discussed in Doyle’s stories. Since their creation by Doyle in the late 19th_{century, the use of the forensic science}

techniques that Holmes both invents, and applies to his cases, have become extremely significant in crime solving today. In his book entitled Logical Investigative Methods Critical Thinking and Reasoning for Successful Investigations, Robert Girod reiterates this. In chapter three of this book, Girod states: “the methods portrayed in Sherlock Holmes stories so effectively dramatized the theory of inductive and deductive reasoning that they are taught by the Metropolitan Police Department, Scotland Yard, at their detective school” (25). This immediately identifies the relevance of Holmes not just as a character who provides literary entertainment, but also as a teaching tool. The chapter further explains that Holmes’ development of his deductive and inductive abilities are paramount to the crux of the story, and thus also key in solving crimes in the real world. An example of Holmes’ skills can be found in the story, A Case of Identity:

“Do you not find,” he said, “that with your short sight it is a little trying to do so much typewriting?”

“I did at first,” she answered, “but now I know where the letters are without looking.” Then, suddenly realising the full purport of his words, she gave a violent start, and looked up with fear and astonishment upon her broad, good-humoured face. “You’ve heard about me, Mr Holmes,” she cried, “else how could you know all that?”

“Never mind,” said Holmes, laughing, “it is my business to know things. Perhaps I have trained myself to see what others overlook. If not, why should you have come to consult me?” (Doyle, Adventures 35-36)

(14)

From this passage, it is clear to see that Holmes astonishes his clients through his observational skills and his ability to “see what others overlook”. Holmes states that his inductive and deductive reasoning is due to personal training. This is what makes him a good detective and is the reason why people come to consult him in the first place. In addition, Holmes seems to also use his powers of observation to impress women. Typically, Holmes is not shown to be interested in women, with the exception of Irene Adler in the story A Scandal in Bohemia, yet, in the above quotation, Holmes clearly uses his skills to baffle, and subsequently impress Miss Mary Sutherland. Instead of flexing his muscles in a masculine display, Holmes flexes his brain in an attempt to attract a member of the opposite sex to some extent. Further on in the story, Watson himself acknowledges Holmes’ deductive prowess:

“You appear to read a good deal upon her which was quite invisible to me,” I remarked. “Not invisible, but unnoticed, Watson. You did not know where to look, and so you missed all that was important.” (Doyle, Adventures 42)

Here, Holmes seems not to regard his abilities as particularly special. He corrects Watson by stating that the clues were “not invisible” but rather “unnoticed”. This seems to be a crucial turn of phrase. The word ‘invisible’ indicates that these clues are either not present or not observable to the average man. This, then, gives Holmes a slightly supernatural quality because he is able to recognise and observe them. However, the word “unnoticed” once again emphasises Holmes’ ability to notice things which remain beyond the capabilities of the average man. This therefore suggests that Watson suffers from some sort of deficiency since he has “missed” important details pertaining to clients and cases, not because they were not there, but because he lacks that skill and discipline to see them. Thus, Watson is perhaps less of a man because he is not trained in science. Girod’s discussion of Holmes’ powers of deductive reasoning support the reading of Holmes as an enlightened man of science. By mentioning that Holmes’ forensic techniques are still used today, albeit adapted to crime solving in the 21st _{century, Girod inadvertently emphasises Holmes’ masculine state as}

being progressive rather than coarse and brutish. On the other hand, in her paper, Nation, identity and the fascination with forensic science in Sherlock Holmes and CSI, Ellen Harrington argues that in many of Doyle’s stories, Holmes’ logic is often flawed. This gives the impression that Holmes is perhaps not entirely genuine in his assessment of a case and that he may rely on bluffing his way though, in some part, his analysis of a particular crime. Harrington does go on to say, though, that this “does little to decrease public acceptance and enjoyment of the fiction” (370). However, despite Holmes’ inconsistent uses of logic, Doyle’s stories “position Holmes as the signifier of rational detective method” (Harrington 370) and he still remains “an unassailable representative of truth” (Harrington 370). Thus, although Holmes is not an actual - as opposed to fictional - representative

(15)

of infallible forensic techniques, Harrington expresses the idea that “the series sells the reassuring fictions that law and order can retain such a valuable, almost omnipotent ally, that mysteries can be effectually solved by the examination of mere traces, that human beings are utterly predictable, even in their criminal predilections” (Harrington 370), and it is this that makes Holmes such a successful and popular character.

2.1.3 Science in 19

th

_{century Britain}

As well as deductive abilities, Holmes is extremely proficient in other aspects of science, primarily chemistry. As mentioned previously, his use of scientific methods is presented as aiding him in solving cases and provides him with an advantage over the London police force. An example of Holmes’ use of science can be observed in the following quotation:

Holmes was seated at his side table clad in his dressing gown and working hard over a chemical investigation. A large curved retort was boiling furiously in the bluish flame of a Bunsen burner, and the distilled drops were condensing into a two-litre measure. My friend hardly glanced up as I entered, and I, seeing that his investigation must be of importance, seated myself in an armchair and waited. He dipped into this bottle or that, drawing out a few drops of each with his glass pipette, and finally brought a test tube containing a solution over to the table. In his right hand he had a slip of litmus paper.

“You come at a crisis, Watson,” said he. “If this paper remains blue, all is well. If it turns red, it means a man’s life.” He dipped it into the test tube and it flushed at once into a dull, dirty crimson. “Hum! I thought as much!” he cried. (Doyle, Memoirs 201)

Here, Holmes’ scientific techniques are seen to be heavily influential when it comes to solving crimes and deciding on the fates of others, which, in some way, emphasises the significance of science in 19th century Britain. As well as this, the terms used in the above quotation are incredibly specific, particularly to the scientific field of chemistry. Watson mentions words such as “curved retort”, “Bunsen burner”, “distilled”, “condensing”, “glass pipette”, “test tube”, and “litmus paper”. This shows him to be a man who is comfortable in a lab setting since he is able to correctly identify specific lab equipment, thus showing him to be a masculine figure through his scientific knowledge. Additionally, Holmes’ hands-on use of such equipment sets him up as a character who actively, and successfully, uses science for his own gain, in this case, to solve crimes. He physically holds the glass pipette and the test tube, as well as consciously dipping the litmus paper into the test tube. These actions establish Holmes as a masculine figure who is comfortable with using scientific

(16)

equipment to achieve his goal. Furthermore, Watson mentions that Holmes “hardly glanced up” as he entered the room and so he sat “in an armchair and waited”. These quotations indicate the relationship between Holmes and Watson as it is clear to see who is the most important, and the most respected, within the pair. Holmes stations himself as the alpha male because it is Watson who waits patiently for him to have completed his task. In this way, Holmes’ masculinity is once again affirmed in the way that Watson reacts towards his friend, leading readers to see a connection between the understanding, and the use of, scientific techniques and an elevated masculine status. The significance of science in 19th _{century Britain is also supported by Harrington, who points out}

that the late Victorian period encouraged “science and reason over mysticism” and valued “superior physical and mental capability” (370). Part of Sherlock Holmes’ popularity stemmed from the fact that “scientific method and rational thought [were]glorified in the controlled medium of fiction” (Harrington 370). Once again, Holmes’ masculinity is emphasised in the context of society in the 19th century. In her doctorate dissertation entitled Detecting Masculinity: The Positive Masculine Qualities of Fictional Detectives, Amy Griswold associates Holmes’ use of science with the growth in forensic science techniques used in Britain at the end of the 19th_{century “when the idea of detecting}

crimes became interesting” (15), proposing that Homes “ is a product of the scientific interest of the 19th _{century” (7). Holmes’ role as a detective is therefore favoured because he represents a}

“scientific approach to crime solving” (Griswold 7) that was extremely popular at the time, which also emphasises him as a masculine figure. Not only is Holmes in possession of great scientific knowledge, he is able to use it to “assess the guilt of the thoroughly irrational and uncontrolled behaviour of human beings, even ones who face serious moral dilemmas” (Griswold 10). Therefore, Holmes shows that “science can provide an answer to crime even when motive is obscure” (Griswold 10). This is significant because it reiterates the new scientific attitude of 19th century Britain, so much so that Griswold states: “Sherlock Holmes shows the public what a truly masculine man should know” (16).

Additionally, in his paper, “Real” Men: Construction of Masculinity in the Sherlock Holmes Nar-ratives, Joseph Kestner highlights masculine qualities that were highly valued in Victorian culture: “observation, rationalism, facticity, logic, comradeship, pluck, and daring” (77). With this list, he demonstrates that Holmes acted as a character that the readership could look up to and emulate. This is particularly the case when we take the Victorian context into account. Doyle published his Sherlock Holmes stories in the Strand Magazine which was predominately read by men. Kestner discusses masculinity in late 19th century Britain, stating that its construction was “of particular concern” on account of several reasons including “the difficulty of finding recruits for the Victorian army due to physical and intellectual inadequacies of young men [and]the effects of a global eco-nomic depression during the final decades of the century” (78) which all culminated in a “perceived ‘crisis of masculinity’ in late-Victorian society” (78). Therefore, as Kestner suggests, the character

(17)

of Sherlock Holmes provided an example for all Victorian men to emulate, but, in order for this to be successful, it “rested on male-reader identification with the masculinity presented in Holmes himself” (78). In his paper, Kestner also brings forward an argument perpetrated by Ernst Kaemmel:

“Sherlock Holmes was a representative of law, justice, and capitalist order: his readers, generally middle-class and lower middle-class people, whose interest ... was based ... on the acuity and superiority of the detective, with whom they were inclined to identify themselves, expect the violated order to be reconstituted in a suspenseful story ... ” (Kaemmel as quoted in Kestner 78).

This quotation emphasises the role that Doyle’s stories played in respects to the male readership of the Strand Magazine. Here, Kaemmel clearly indicates that readers were able to “identify them-selves” with Holmes, thus highlighting his significance as a role model to 19thcentury males. Holmes’ varied qualities, including his scientific ability, courage, and use of logic, not only show him to be a masculine figure, but also stress the desired masculine traits required to break away from the “crisis of masculinity” of the 19th _{century. Hence, in this way, Doyle was able to engage with the}

fears of his readership by presenting to them a proposed idealised form of masculinity. However, Kester also emphasises the embellished use of Holmes’ logic within the stories. He mentions the reaction of Robert Anderson, a Scotland Yard police officer, who in 1903 wrote that “‘the incidents of many of these tales could never be accepted as within the category of possible fact”’ (Kestner 77). Therefore, whilst the stories themselves represent an idealised form of masculinity, their methods of representation can perhaps be brought into question due to the dubious nature surrounding the logic that Holmes employs. On the other hand, Kestner still acknowledges the power of Doyle’s story telling by adding that “the story interest depended on the tale rather than the logic” (77). This suggests that the story as a whole was instrumental in the development of masculinity, rather than its individual aspects.

2.2 Sherlock Holmes and Violence

Holmes, as a masculine figure, is set out within Doyle’s canon. Throughout the stories, Holmes is, on the whole, portrayed as the lead masculine character. An example of this can be observed in the following quote in which Holmes and Watson leave Baker Street in order to get some answers pertaining to Miss Mary Morstan’s case in The Sign of Four :

(18)

I picked up my hat and my heaviest stick, but I observed that Holmes took his revolver from his drawer and slipped it into his pocket. It was clear that he thought that our night’s work might be a serious one. (Doyle, The Sign of Four 24)

Watson’s willingness to defend himself is emphasised by his choice of accessory. Doyle makes it clear, through the use of the word “heaviest”, that Watson selectively chooses to arm himself. On the other hand, Holmes reaches for a much more devastating weapon. The revolver, here, represents technological advancement which has replaced the crude, and arguably more barbaric, stick. Holmes’ use of technology therefore elevates him to the position of the enlightened masculine figure because he has embraced more modern, and more progressive, ways of defending himself. Thus, by choosing to take a revolver rather than just his usual cane, Holmes establishes himself as the more heroic of the two men and more conventionally masculine in some way. Through Watson’s reaction to his friend’s choice of weapon, it becomes obvious that Holmes seems to have a better understanding of what to expect as the two friends set out to continue their investigation. Watson’s instinct was to carry his “heaviest stick” as a precaution, but Holmes’ instinct to carry a revolver shows that he has more insight into the situation and therefore wants to be better prepared for the worst. At the same time however, his immediate choice of the revolver can also show him to be more prone to violence and more barbaric, thus counteracting his enlightened and forward thinking masculinity traits. Yet, throughout the stories, Doyle continues to support the idea that Holmes purely uses such weapons for self-defence and only if provoked; they are not used to demonstrate his abilities as a physically demanding man. This can be observed in The Red-Headed League when Holmes and Watson are confronted by a gun toting criminal:

The light flashed on the barrel of a revolver, but Holmes’s hunting crop came down on the man’s wrist, and the pistol clinked upon the stone floor. (Doyle, Adventures 72)

Here, Holmes uses his hunting crop as a means for self-preservation and is not the initiator of violence. Hence, by doing showing Holmes in this way, Doyle ensures that it is Holmes’ intelligence that is emphasised, and that Holmes is first and foremost a societal representation of modern, rational masculinity rather than just a cruel brute.

2.3 Sherlock Holmes vs James Moriarty

The Final Problem, which can be found in The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes collection, was Doyle’s last intended Sherlock Holmes story. In it, he sentences Holmes to death. Within the story, readers

(19)

are introduced to Moriarty; the ultimate villain to Holmes’ (anti) hero. The dynamic between these two men differs greatly to the relationship between Holmes and Watson. Doyle creates Moriarty as the perfect nemesis for Holmes. He displays a similar level of intelligence to Holmes, yet he uses this to engage in criminal activity, whilst Holmes uses his superior intellect to solve crimes. Holmes’ apparent fear of Moriarty, of the crime syndicate he has created, and of the power he seems to wield, seems to place Holmes in a weakened and submissive situation. Within the story of The Final Problem, Holmes flees London with Watson because he has been successful in disbanding Moriarty’s hired criminals and now fears for his life. This behaviour seems to significantly change the way in which Holmes is portrayed as an in control, rational figure since Moriarty now takes on that role as he asserts his dominance over Holmes. This can be observed through Holmes’ decision to leave London until the police have arrested Moriarty and his crime network: “‘It is obvious, therefore, that I cannot do better than get away for the few days which remain before the police are at liberty to act”’ (Doyle, Memoirs 244). In the beginning of the story, Holmes tells Watson about Moriarty and the influence he has had on crime in London. Through this informative conversation, Holmes seems, in some part, to be in awe of Moriarty’s power:

“He is the Napoleon of crime, Watson. He is the organiser of half that is evil and nearly all that is undetected in this great city. He is a genius, a philosopher, an abstract thinker. He has a brain of the first order. He sits motionless, like a spider in the centre of its web, but that web has a thousand radiations, and he knows well every quiver of each of them. He does little himself. He only plans. But his agents are numerous and splendidly organised. Is there a crime to be done, a paper to be abstracted, we will say, a house to be rifled, a man to be removed - the word is passed to the Professor, the matter is organised and carried out. The agent may be caught. In that case, money is found for his bail or his defence. But the central power which uses the agent is never caught - never so much as suspected. This was the organisation which I deduced, Watson, and which I devoted my whole energy to exposing and breaking up.” (Doyle, Memoirs 239-240)

Holmes’ description of Moriarty, and the spider simile that he uses, all aid to emphasise Moriarty’s position as the leader of the crime syndicate. Spiders are often feared and have come to represent darkness and evil. In the same way, Moriarty is also feared, since Doyle insinuates that he is one of the most powerful and most cruel men in the world. In addition, the image of the web is typically associated with the action of trapping, as spiders can lie in wait for their prey. The idea being that the prey comes to the spider, and so the spider never really has to seek out prey. Webs are also very sensitive to vibrations which allow the spider to tell where the prey is located. This provides a good analogy to Moriarty who is both aware of all the actions within his syndicate, and also

(20)

does not need to leave the ‘web’ in order to work successfully. Therefore, Moriarty’s leadership and influence seem to worry Holmes, which has encouraged him to seek out and be aware of the way in which Moriarty’s organisation is run. However, there are several instances where Moriarty’s position of dominance over Holmes is brought into question, particularly in respects to masculinity. For example, Moriarty’s title of “Professor” denotes a studious, quiet, and perhaps also frail man. These images are extremely far removed from associations with masculinity, making Moriarty seem weakened when compared with Holmes, who possesses no such title. In addition, Holmes refers to Moriarty as “the Napoleon of crime”. Comparing Moriarty with Napoleon creates a potentially positive connotation, especially because Napoleon was an impressive leader of men and a powerful figure. Nevertheless, Napoleon is not often regarded as the epitome of masculinity. This is partly due to his short stature, which made it difficult for him to be regarded as a demanding masculine figure, and the fact that he was defeated by the English at the Battle of Waterloo. These two factors suggest that a comparison between Moriarty and Napoleon is, instead, a negative one, and so it is not surprising that Moriarty, as a feared and organised man, is compared to Napoleon, who was also feared, extremely organised, and subsequently, also defeated. Furthermore, Moriarty is described as a man who is “organised” and an “abstract thinker”. Instead of carrying out the crime himself, he hires others to do it for him. This therefore shows him to be a weakened figure; one who is not physically capable of actively taking part in the crime, even though he is mentally capable of doing so. Yet the fact that he is never caught is a testament to his intelligence and to his abilities in controlling and maintaining his crime syndicate. Even though he may not represent the epitome of masculinity, Moriarty is still a dangerous figure. He seems to have the upper hand in his battle with Holmes, yet he is perhaps less of a representative of masculinity than Holmes is. This is further supported at the end of the above quotation when Holmes mentions that he has “deduced” all this information and is determined to expose and break up the syndicate. With this, we can observe a shift in power, and thus a shift in masculinity. Again, Holmes’ scientific use of deductive reasoning allows him to establish an advantage over Moriarty and because of this his masculinity seems more emphasised. In addition to this, Holmes makes it very clear that he is aware of Moriarty’s presence as they travel through Europe. He tells Watson so:

“Every precaution is still necessary,” he whispered. “I have reason to think that they are hot upon our trail. Ah, there is Moriarty himself.” (Doyle, Memoirs 246)

Thus, on the surface, Holmes behaves as though Moriarty has bested him and that he is afraid for his life, in actuality Holmes continues to remain one step ahead, fully aware of the situation and the many potential outcomes. This becomes apparent further on in the story, and in subsequent Sherlock Holmes stories, when readers discover that Holmes did not really die at the hands of Moriarty. Doyle

(21)

therefore seems to play with the reader’s perceptions of Holmes as he fluctuates between being a dominant masculine figure and a submissive weakened one. Yet, Holmes ultimately triumphs as a more powerful force than that of Moriarty. Holmes’ position as a more dominant masculine character is further supported by Griswold who points out that Holmes “uses any means necessary to capture criminals and disregards physical danger of all types in his hunt for them” (6). This is definitely the case when it comes to Moriarty, since Holmes utilises his resources whilst pursuing Moriarty in London as indicated when he says: “I devoted my whole energy to exposing and breaking up [Moriarty’s crime organisation]” (Doyle, Memoirs 240). In addition, Griswold states that Holmes “goes willingly to his death ...in order to remove Moriarty from the world” (6). Through this action, Holmes shows himself to represent a true masculine figure who is willing to sacrifice himself for what he regards as the greater good.

2.4 Questioning Sherlock Holmes’ Masculinity

In his article, Becoming a ”Mere Appendix”: The Rehabilitated Masculinity of Sherlock Holmes, Tom Bragg questions Holmes’ masculinity. In particular, he focuses on Doyle’s first novel, A Study in Scarlet. Since this is the first time the public was introduced to Holmes, his characterisation within the story is significant as it sets up his position for the remainder of the series. However, Bragg argues that Holmes is portrayed as less than masculine in this first story, stating that he has “a nervous energy seemingly approaching hysteria at times, and an excessive vanity, revealed in stereotypically priggish mannerisms”. Watson’s first impression of Holmes is tinged with “childish and effeminate terms” (Bragg 10). When Holmes shows Watson the results of his latest scientific experiment he is visibly excited, “clapping his hands, and looking as delighted as a child with a new toy” (Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 14). Holmes’ actions here support the idea that he is lacking masculinity because he is behaving in a childish way. This, then, reduces his position as a grown man, and as a classical example of masculinity. A further example of Holmes’ emotional display occurs when Watson compliments his forensic science abilities: “My companion flushed up at my words, and the earnest way in which I uttered them. I had already observed that he was as sensitive to flattery on the score of his art as any girl could be of her beauty” (Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 40). Here, Doyle compares Holmes to a female, thereby further reducing his masculinity since his feelings of sensitivity, hysteria, and nervousness are emotions more commonly associated with females (Bragg 11). Bragg adds that “such emotional displays are highly incongruous for a character constructed as ‘a calculating machine”’ (10). The phrase ‘calculating machine’ is often affiliated with Homes’ character, and so these slightly more feminine behaviour quirks also act as a stark contrast to the blatant masculinity he displays in later stories. However, Bragg indicates that for Holmes,

(22)

“the ‘science of deduction’ is an art and the cultivation of his faculties touch upon his tenderest emotions” (Bragg 11-12), and so although he is portrayed as less than pure masculine, his emotions are understandable and accepted, in some way, by the reader. Holmes’ slightly more effeminate characteristics are perhaps even more pronounced because of his interaction with Watson, who acts as his foil. Watson is portrayed in a more masculine role, particularly through his background in the military. Bragg notices that the novel begins with an introduction to Watson’s time in the army: “I was duly attached to the Fifth Northumberland Fusiliers as Assistant Surgeon” (Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 9). Watson goes on to describe himself being injured during the Battle of Maiwand where he was “struck on the shoulder by a Jezail bullet, which shattered the bone and grazed the subclavian artery” (Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 9). This wounding perhaps questions Watson’s masculinity because of its associations with impotency. Yet Bragg argues that “to Victorian males, [Watson’s injury]would signify the most heroic qualities of British manhood in the face of adversity” (Bragg 12). Bragg suggests that Watson’s war history, his injury, and his medical knowledge “masculinises the ambiguous atmosphere of Study” (12) because it provides a contrast with Holmes’ slightly less masculine (according to Bragg) character.

2.5 Dr John Watson and Masculinity

The character of Dr John Watson plays many roles in Doyle’s oeuvre. Not only is he set up as a foil character for Holmes, but he is also Holmes’ closest friend and the narrator of all the stories. As a male character, Watson’s masculinity is also brought into question. Arguably, Watson is similar to Holmes in that he is also a man of science since he is a doctor. Yet, although he is good at his job (which is proved multiple times in Doyle’s work: “‘Good heavens!’ I cried, ‘this is a terrible injury’ ... I sponged the wound, cleaned it, dressed it; and, final, covered it over with cotton wadding and carbolized bandages” (Doyle, Adventures 193-194) ) he lacks the understanding of what can be termed as ‘pure science’, which is essentially what we call ‘forensic science’ today. Even though he realises his limitations and is impressed with his friend’s abilities to conduct experiments and to solve crimes based on the results, he is much more concerned with the humanistic element of the crimes. This manifests itself in Watson spending more time thinking about the clients, and how they must be feeling about the crime, than Sherlock does. An example of this is when Thaddeus Sholto, in The Sign of Four, flippantly discusses the death of Mary Morstan’s father with her, Watson, and Holmes:

“Had your father, Miss Morstan, refrained from throwing a strain upon his heart, he might have been alive now.” I could have struck the man across the face, so hot was I at

(23)

this callous and offhand reference to so delicate a matter. Miss Morstan sat down, and her face grew white to the lips. (Holmes, The Sign of Four 30)

As this quotation suggests, Watson seems to be rather angry with Sholto because of the distress that he has caused Miss Mary Morstan. Sholto’s callousness is thus countered by Watson’s sympathetic nature. During this passage, it is difficult to ascertain Holmes’ reaction to the situation. Watson does not allude to Holmes showing sympathy to Mary’s condition. This may be due to the fact that Homes is more detached, emotion-wise, than Watson is, and since the stories are told from Watson’s point of view, readers cannot be certain of Holmes’ true feelings at any point in the story. Additionally, Doyle frequently shows Watson to be a compassionate man. In The Final Problem, the last story within The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes collection, Holmes and Watson climb to the Reichenbach Falls together. On the way, Watson is called back to the hotel to help an English woman who “was in the last stages of consumption” (Doyle, Memoirs 251). As always, Watson’s duty as a medical professional is to help the sick. He remarks:

The appeal was one which could not be ignored. It was impossible to refuse the request of a fellow-countrywoman dying in a strange land. (Doyle, Memoirs 252)

Watson then goes on to say: “Yet I had my scruples about leaving Holmes” (Doyle, Memoirs 252). He is reluctant to leave his friend at the Reichenbach Falls alone and in potential danger. The dilemma that Watson feels emphasises his desire to help and support others. In this way then, Watson’s empathy and kind hearted nature are seen to correspond well to his profession as a doctor. However, it can also be argued that these attributes have the potential to be regarded as weaknesses because they are perhaps commonly associated with females rather than males. On the other hand, in her chapter entitled, Thinking Masculine: Sherlock Holmes, Amy Griswold argues that Watson’s more emotional tendencies are not a hindrance to his masculinity (24). She states: “Holmes does not allow his judgement to be overthrown by emotion. He presents himself as a thinking rather than feeling character” (Griswold 23). This is clearly contrasted to Watson’s emotional behaviour since Holmes “sneers at the emotionalism of characters” (Griswold 23), whilst Watson “feels able to express admiration for Holmes and love for women without a loss of masculinity” (Griswold 24). She then goes on to say that Holmes “represents the idealised masculinity in his society because he can separate his emotions from his intellect. He uses cold science to find the truth” (Griswold 27). So whilst Watson displays a more compassionate version of masculinity, Holmes’ rationality and scientific tendencies are what elevate his masculine status. However, Holmes does show affection towards Watson through the “manly emotion of loyal friendship” (Griswold 28). Even though Holmes does not explicitly show his feelings, Griswold still argues that “Watson does not see Holmes

(24)

as stingy with his affection but as supremely masculine in his lack of vocal expression” (29). Griswold explains that visible emotion during the Victorian era, particularly in the form of male bonding, was both unusual and unwarranted, so even though Holmes “clearly feels strongly about Watson; he is just prohibited by disposition and culture from expressing it very often” (29).

Griswold’s argument about Watson’s position as a masculine figure is further supported by Tom Bragg. In particular, Bragg focuses on Watson’s representation in The Sign of Four. In this novel, Watson plays “a variety of masculine roles” (Bragg 17). His official position as a doctor enables him to take “personal responsibility for [Holmes’]health” (Bragg 17). This can be seen in the way in which Watson responds to Homes’ drug use in the novel, warning him against the harmful effects:

“But consider!” I said earnestly. “Count the cost! Your brain may, as you say, be roused and excited, but it is a pathological and morbid process which involves increased tissue change and may at least leave a permanent weakness.” (Doyle, The Sign of Four 8)

In addition to this, Watson also “takes an active part in every facet of the investigation” (Bragg 17). Again, this mostly seems to manifest itself in Watson’s medical skills, for example when he provides an opinion as to how a character has been murdered:

“Death from some powerful vegetable alkaloid,” I answered, “some strychnine-like sub-stance which would produce tetanus.” (Doyle, The Sign of Four 53)

Furthermore, Watson shows his masculinity though physical tasks such as “accompanying [Holmes]on a bloodhound chase, and firing his weapon alongside Holmes’s to bring down an attacker” (Bragg 17):

Holmes had already drawn his revolver, and I whipped out mine ... Our pistols rang out together. (Doyle, The Sign of Four 101-102)

Thus, Watson shows himself to be as much of a masculine figure as Holmes is. Perhaps even more significant than his professional role as a doctor, Watson’s courtship of Miss Mary Morstan in The Sign of Four displays his masculinity more readily. Bragg proposes that by the end of the novel, “Holmes and Watson are now following separate paths: Watson towards a respectable, health and normal life, Holmes down the slippery slope of degeneration” (17). Bragg goes on to discuss the social implications of Watson’s desire for a wife and his subsequent marriage. He brings forward that as a “retired army surgeon on half-pay, [Watson]must find a wife as soon as possible if he wishes to

(25)

start a private practice” (18). This is because, as man, Watson would find it difficult to establish a female clientele since they would be reluctant to approach a bachelor general practitioner for medical advice. Hence, Watson’s search for a wife not only elevates his role as a masculine figure, but also makes sense in regards to his position within society. Finally, Bragg suggests that within The Sign of Four, Watson wears many hats. He lists Watson’s roles as “doctor, police surgeon, advisor, wife-wooer, “hunter” and “knight-errant”” (Bragg 18). These varied positions aid in establishing Watson as a dominant masculine character since within the stories, he, as Bragg puts it, “becomes a trusted voice, a dependable ally - a man we should strive to be” (18). Even though Watson can be regarded as a masculine figure, the status of his masculinity fluctuates throughout the stories. As has already been established, Holmes represents less of a masculine figure than Watson does in the first few stories in the series, namely in A Study in Scarlet and The Sign of Four. However, in subsequent stories, the status of Holmes and Watson’s masculinity shift, with Watson becoming a more domesticated figure through his marriage with Mary Morstan, and Holmes becoming more masculine through his scientific endeavours. The first story in The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes collection, A Scandal in Bohemia, immediately shows how the two men have changed, specifically, in their relationship to each other:

I had seen little of Holmes lately. My marriage had drifted us away from each other. My own complete happiness, and the home-centred interests which rise up around the man who first finds himself master of his own establishment, were sufficient to absorb all my attention; while Holmes ... remained in our lodgings in Baker Street, buried among his old books ... and the fierce energy of his own keen nature. He was still, as ever, deeply attracted by the study of crime, and occupied his immense faculties and extraordinary powers of observation in following out those clues, and clearing up those mysteries, which had been abandoned as hopeless by the official police. (Doyle, Adventures 9-10)

Here, Watson shows the extent of his domestication by discussing his “home-centred interests” that have become a priority since his marriage. His role as a masculine figure is somewhat diminished because he seems less involved with Holmes and with assisting in the solving of crime. Therefore, his position as an active and brave man, in the context of aiding Holmes in his crime solving, has been reduced. Holmes, on the other hand, is still living in Baker Street and is still working on cases. Watson points out Holmes’ “immense faculties” and his “extraordinary powers of observation”, thereby elevating Holmes’ position as a masculine figure since he uses these skills to solve difficult crimes. Furthermore, Watson acknowledges that these cases have been “abandoned as hopeless by the official police”. This adds to reiterate Holmes’ masculinity, showing him to possess more masculine traits than the police officers at Scotland Yard, and also Watson himself. His ability

(26)

to solve near impossible cases through his use of the scientific method places him in a position of power and emphasises his masculinity. Even though Holmes now seems to be more of a masculine representative when compared to Watson, Watson still refers to himself as “master of his own establishment”, suggesting that he still holds a masculine position in society. This is in part due to the fact that being married was regarded as more favourable than bachelorhood (Bragg 18). Thus, although it can be argued that Holmes asserts a more masculine role in the short story collections, Watson is not entirely emasculated. Yet, as subsequent stories show, Holmes is portrayed as more masculine than Watson because of his powers of observation and his skills in the natural sciences.

2.6 Sherlock Holmes and Sociology

In her paper Sherlock Holmes and Sociology, Bonnie Menes discusses the role of sociology within Doyle’s oeuvre. She states: “sociology is crucial to Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories, and Sherlock Holmes, in some ways the sociologist par excellence, is at their centre” (101). She suggests that Holmes is a “defender of social norms” (101) and that “he enters a case not when a law, but when a norm, has been broken” (101). By ‘norm’, Menes is referring to the proper order of society and the unspoken rules within society that dictate the ways in which people should behave. An example of this can be seen in A Case of Identity when Miss Mary Sutherland is abandoned at the altar:

“We got to the church first, and when the four-wheeler drove up we waited for him to step out, but he never did, and when the cabman got down from the box and looked, there was no one there!” (Doyle, Adventures 40)

In this instance, no real law has been broken, yet the social norms of a wedding ceremony have been disrupted, and this becomes part of the reason why Holmes is keen to work on Miss Mary Sutherland’s case. Menes points out that “morality is private and, as such, Holmes deems it none of his business. He takes a scientific view of his cases. He leaves it for others to unravel the morality behind their courses of action. He does not fight evil; he investigates problems” (102). Once again, by looking at the aforementioned example, we can observe that even though Mary’s abandonment on her wedding day is perhaps not morally right, Holmes’ interest in the case is not due to this reason. Instead, he is driven by the need to solve the problem of the missing groom and to re-establish social order, because, as Menes puts it, “neither goodness nor justice but social order is Sherlock Holmes’s desire” (102). This is further supported by Martin Booth in his biography of Doyle. Booth discusses themes that were often used by Doyle in his stories: “revenge and blackmail ... along with the avoidance of scandal, the importance of propriety and all the old Victorian values ... ” (250).

(27)

Looking at these themes, it is clear to see that Holmes interacts with issues that Menes regards as societal, thereby confirming her claim of Holmes as a “defender of social norms” (101).

In addition to Holmes’ association with social norms, Menes also mentions Holmes’ relationship to the law: “Sherlock Holmes does not represent positive law, because he does not always agree with the law and because he himself frequently goes beyond the law” (102). Holmes is not a police officer and so he is not constrained by the boundaries of the law, which means that he can take matters into his own hands by acting in a way that often does not correspond with the technical aspects of the law. Once again, this can be seen in A Case of Identity:

“The law cannot, as you say, touch you,” said Holmes ... “yet there never was a man who deserved punishment more. If the young lady has a brother or a friend he ought to lay a whip across your shoulders ... it is not part of my duties to my client, but here’s a hunting crop handy, and I think I shall just treat myself to - ” (Doyle, Adventures 49).

Holmes’ allusion to violence represents his status as a masculine figure because he is seen to be the most dominant character in this scene. His anger and disappointment towards the man who has wronged Miss Mary Sutherland (in this case, Mr James Windibank, Mary’s step father) almost causes him to become physically abusive, regardless of any consequences he may face. This therefore emphasises his relaxed attitude to the law of the land since he is willing to take matters into his own hands. In this example Holmes has almost become the judge, jury, and executioner of this case. He acknowledges that the law cannot be of any help in this situation and so Mr Windibank will go unpunished. Because of this, he is willing to resort to violence as a form of punishment in order to restore social justice. Hence, Holmes’ use of science, his disregard for the law, and his desire to solve cases as quickly and efficiently as possible, ensures that he is successful in re-establishing social norms. Menes goes on to emphasise Holmes’ use of scientific method by pointing out that he “shares his age’s belief in the value of science; and in his own case, of course, science contributes notably in aiding the conquest of crime” (103). Here, she acknowledges that Holmes’ scientific technique is prominent in the reasons behind his ability to solve cases, thus asserting societal order. Holmes’ fragile relationship with the law is further reiterated by Griswold. She notices that Holmes “faces fewer legal restrictions” (20) than the police force because he is a consulting detective. This allows him to follow his “internal code of honour” (Griswold 20) which is based on justice. Griswold mentions that: “Holmes is a meticulously honest man who believes that a wronged person has a right to justice” (20). This behaviour was accepted, according to Griswold, because “the Victorians knew that justice and law might be different things” (20). Furthermore, Holmes’ way of asserting justice is through the collection of scientific data and the use of scientific method. Because of this, Holmes is able to correctly identify the criminal in each case. As a final comment, Griswold states

(28)

that “although Holmes does not abide by lawful principles every time, he does follow his own code of right and wrong” (Griswold 21), and as long as he is able to solve the case, this behaviour is supported by the readership. Thus, it is clear to see that Holmes uses science and his version of justice to supports his role as a masculine character and allows him to assert dominance over the ‘wrong-doer’ through his behaviour as a rational and progressive man.

2.7 Sherlock Holmes: A Summary

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s creation of the world’s most famous detective, Sherlock Holmes, has proved significant to the way masculinity was regarded in 19th century Britain. Within the stories, Holmes manipulates science in such a way that showcases his masculinity. Even though there has been some debate with regards to Holmes’ masculinity in the first novel, A Study in Scarlet, I have attempted to point out that the early forensic science techniques that Holmes develops emphasises his elevated and enlightened position in society. As well as this, the masculinisation of Watson’s character is also apparent. Watson acts as foil character to Holmes, both within the narrative of the stories and in terms of his masculinity. In spite of the fact that Watson is identified as a masculine character, due to his profession as a doctor and his marriage to Miss Mary Morstan, he arguably represents a lesser masculine role when compared to Holmes. This is mostly because of the way Holmes is able to manipulate science in his pursuit of the truth and in order to solve the case. Furthermore, Holmes is the main focus in all of Doyle’s stories. Because of this, his position as a main character and his role as an example of a masculine figure are both emphasised. Holmes’ relationships with other characters in the stories help to elevate his masculinity. Whilst there are situations in which Holmes’ masculinity is questioned, particularly when he is compared to some of the other male characters in the stories, his almost superhuman detective abilities and his thorough understanding of the scientific method allow him to maintain his masculinity status, so that ultimately he represents a true masculine figure.

(29)

Chapter 3

H. G. Wells

“...[Doctor Moreau]explained his work to me. He was very simple and con-vincing. Now and then there was a touch of sarcasm in his voice...The creatures I had seen were not men, had never been men. They were animals -humanized animals - triumphs of vivisection.” (Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau 70-71)

Herbert George Wells was born in England in 1866. He studied science at the Normal School of Science in South Kensington, London. Whilst there, Wells was extensively taught by T. H. Huxley, who is widely regarded as “ one of the most influential scientific thinkers of the Victorian age” (Parinder viii). Under Huxley, Wells developed an understanding of and a love for science, which later manifested itself in the writing he produced. An untitled article published in the Lancet in 1946 discussed Wells’ main focus of his novels, stating that: “he believed in education as the only hope of giving men control over themselves and hence of their own inventions” (Lancet 279). Wells therefore attempted to present science in his novels as a way of allowing his readership to be aware of the developments in society, and by doing so he “opened so many peoples’ minds to the possibilities of science” (Lancet 279). Wells’ work was incredibly influential in the late 19th _{century due to the}

themes that he focused on. Primarily, Wells’ attitudes towards themes of the human condition and scientific progress are very much reflected in his novels. As well as this, these themes supported and emphasised the thoughts of society in 19th _{century Britain, not only in terms of scientific}

breakthroughs, but also in regards to the portrayal of masculinity. Wells’ own background in science helped him to convey the scientific message to his readers, whilst his male protagonists showcased examples of masculinity in its various forms. In this chapter, I will discuss Wells’ novel, The Island of Doctor Moreau, in relation to its position within scientific understanding of the late 19th _century.

A Study in Masculinity: The Representation of Masculinity in 19th Century Popular British Fiction