LEOPOLD-FRANZENS-UNIVERSITÄT INNSBRUCK Philologisch-Kulturwissenschaftliche Fakultät Institut für
Anglistik
Female Agency in 21st Century Adaptations
Diplomarbeit
zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades einer Magistra der Philosophie (Mag.a phil.)
eingereicht von
Maria Rigato
bei PD Dr. Dorothee Birke
Innsbruck, April 2020 Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck
Plagiarism Disclaimer
I hereby declare that this diploma thesis is my own and autonomous work. All sources and aids used have been indicated as such. All texts either quoted directly or paraphrased have been indicated by in-text citations. Full bibliographic details are given in the list of works cited, which also contains internet sources including URL and access date. This work has not been submitted to any other examination authority.
April 2020 (Signature)
Acknowledgements
First of all, I would like to thank Professor Dorothee Birke for her immense support, patience and constructive feedback. She guided me through the entire process and whenever I did not know how to continue, I could always count on her advice.
Then, I would like to thank my family, especially my parents, who supported me throughout the entire time and never stopped believing in me.
A special thank you goes to Hannah Lackinger who provided me with emotional support, valid criticism as well as amazing ideas when my head was too clouded and I could no longer see the bigger picture.
Finally, I am grateful for my partner and my friends who were always there for me when I was frustrated and needed either a distraction or a motivational speech, as well as for Johnny Ray DeMaine for proofreading my thesis
Thank you for your support!
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Female Detective Fiction: Origins, Development and Typology 3 2.1. Characteristics of Detective Fiction according to Vera Nünning 3 2.2. Origins of Female Detective Fiction and the Pre-Golden Age Era 6 2.3. The Golden Age and 20th Century Detective Fiction 11 2.4. Typology of Female Detectives 18
3. The Representation of Women in Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes Stories 25 3.1. Sherlock Holmes – Detective Extraordinaire 25 3.2. From the Angel in the House to the “New Woman” 28 3.3. The Oppression of Women due to Victorian Morals and the Patriarchal System 32 3.4. Portrayal and Agency of Conan Doyle’s Villainesses 38 3.4. Proactive Women and The Woman 41
4. Re-Interpreting Sherlock Holmes from a Female Perspective in Birkby’s The House at Baker Street: Behind Every Great Detective Stands a Great Woman… 46 4.1. Re-centering Female Characters – Moving Women to the Foreground 46 4.1.1. Narration from a Female Perspective 46 4.1.2. Female Characters’ Development 55 4.2. De-centering Male Characters – Pushing Men into the Background 67 4.3. Birkby’s Views on Marriage 72
5. Sherlock’s Re-Interpretatiorn of Gender Roles and Female Stereotypes 78 5.1. Molly Hooper and the Professionalization of Women 78 5.2. Mrs Hudson and the Art of Manipulation 86 5.3. Irene Adler and the Sexualisation of the Female Body 89
6. Conclusion 96
7. Teaching Sherlock Holmes in the EFL-Classroom 100 7.1. The Importance of Teaching Literature in EFL-Classrooms 100 7.3. Didactic Approach and Class Description 101 7.4. Description and Analysis of the Proposed Lessons 103 7.4. Teaching Materials / Handouts 109
8. Works Cited 112 8.1. Primary Sources 112 8.2. Secondary Sources 113 8.3. Digital Images 121
1. Introduction
This thesis focuses on the agency of the female characters portrayed in three selected works of the Sherlock Holmes canon. The works in question are Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s original Sherlock Holmes series, Michelle Birkby’s The House at Baker Street and the BBC’s TV series Sherlock. The first part of this paper functions as the theoretical foundation for the analytical chapters. Thus, it deals with the emergence of female detective fiction and its development from the 19th to the 21st century. The initial chapter analyses the struggles female detectives were faced with, since it was thought that being a women and being a detective meant being either an unwomanly woman or a second-rate detective. This binary is reflected in several crime novels, in which the starring female detective had to choose between a successful personal life or a career. Throughout the years different types of female detectives developed such as the amateur sleuth, the academic woman detective, the hard-boiled female investigator, the police woman, and the lesbian detective. This typology of female detectives will be outlined and discussed in detail. The third chapter is dedicated to the original Sherlock Holmes series by Arthur Conan Doyle, and more specifically to its representation of women. Thus, it will focus on the secondary characters of the series, with particular attention dedicated to their function and agency. This chapter also includes an overview of the position of women in society in the Victorian Era, their role within the domestic sphere, and the emergence of the New Woman. Several female characters portrayed in Doyle’s stories are depicted as weak and oppressed by male authoritative figures. However, various women do not simply accept their victimization and react by becoming perpetrators. Particular attention will be given to proactive characters such as Irene Adler, Violet Hunter and Mary Morstan. The main part of this thesis deals with Michelle Birkby’s The House at Baker Street. While it is still set in the Victorian Period, it has a more feminist approach as it is written from the perspective of a woman and clearly shows an increased female agency compared to Doyle’s version, since the lead detectives Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson are substituted by Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson with the occasional help of Irene Adler. This chapter will be analysed through the lens of Ansgar
1 Nünning’s concept of the revisionist historical novel, thus, the representation of the female characters as well as the setting and narrative techniques play a vital role for the analysis. The interplay between these feminist female characters and the strong influence of the rigid Victorian social systems highlights the problems faced by women in the late 19th century in England. Furthermore, the perception of space is quite different compared to Doyle’s version. For example, Mrs. Hudson’s kitchen functions as her study and becomes the backdrop for a great deal of scenes, whereas in Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes it is never mentioned. Lastly, the female bond plays a key role in this novel, not only between Mrs. Hudson and Mary Watson, but also relations towards other women. The two protagonists are willing to go to extreme lengths to help other women and save their reputations. Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson take on the case merely out of compassion and not for monetary gain. The fifth chapter focuses on the BBC’s TV series Sherlock which is set in the present-day. Even though in Sherlock the leading detectives are men, women still play a vital role and have a strong influence on the male characters. The female characters are respected by their male counterparts and are not seen as inferior; for instance, Sherlock admires Irene not for her beauty but for her intellect, and considers Mary and Molly as an equal. Mrs. Hudson, on the other hand, functions as a motherly figure to Sherlock and Dr Watson. Furthermore, these women have all peculiar background stories - Mrs. Hudson was married to a drug dealer and murderer, Mary Watson is a former spy and hired assassin, and Irene Adler is a dominatrix. The last part of this thesis comprises a lesson plan, which includes a series of tasks dealing with the role of women in the Victorian period. The difficulties women had to face during this period of time are concretized and exemplified in Conan Doyle’s “A Case of Identity”. This short story will be discussed thoroughly and will function as the starting point for the writing task, which consists of the re- writing of “A Case of Identity”.
2 2. Female Detective Fiction: Origins, Development and Typology
2.1. Characteristics of Detective Fiction according to Vera Nünning
Several scholars have attempted to define detective fiction, its characteristics and its subgenres. These different definitions vary in length and content, ranging from short ones, as for instance in the Encyclopædia Britannica where it is defined as follows: “[d]etective story, type of popular literature in which a crime is introduced and investigated and the culprit is revealed” (Luebering), to broad ones, where scholars dedicated entire books to the topic such as Martin Priestman’s The Cambridge Companion to Crime Fiction or John Scaggs’s Crime Fiction. For the purposes of this work, Vera Nünning’s definition was chosen for several reasons. Firstly, because it is concise and straightforward. Secondly, because the boundaries between the different sub-genres and their respective characteristics are clearly defined. Thirdly and most importantly, because the main features of the detective novel and the characteristics of the detective are not gender-specific. This is essential since in this thesis both female and male detectives will be discussed. According to Vera Nünning, the main characteristic of detective fiction is the eccentric detective who solves crimes by means of deduction, induction and sometimes intuition1 (5). The detective appears to be exceptionally intelligent and is thus able to solve the most complicated cases, as for instance Dupin in “The Murders of Rue Morgue”. Another characteristic of this detective is, according to Nünning, the detective’s expansive scientific knowledge (5). In most cases the character of the detective works independently from the police force. This typical trait is exemplified in the Sherlock Holmes stories, e.g. Holmes occasionally helps out Inspector Lestrade but is not employed by a police department. In fact, Nünning points out that in the Sherlock Holmes stories not all the perpetrators are arrested or brought to justice (5). Nünning argues that the eccentric detective is frequently accompanied by a loyal companion who, although smart, is not as intelligent as the detective (V.
1 The section 2.1. Characteristics of Detective Fiction according to Vera Nünning is my translation and summary of Nünning’s chapter “Britische und amerikanische Kriminalromane: Genrekonventionen und neuere Entwicklungstendenzen
3 Nünning 6). According to Nünning, the loyal companion, who in Sherlock Holmes’ case is Dr Watson, fulfils different functions (6): First of all, the companion embodies the morals and the norms in the story’s represented time period (V. Nünning 6), which arguably helps to contrast the detective’s eccentricity and unconventionality. Secondly, the loyal companion functions as the narrator of the story allowing the reader to perceive the detective and his investigation through the eyes of the companion. Thirdly, he or she elevates the detective by being in constant awe and admiration of the detective’s deductions. Lastly, the companion’s lack of knowledge of the detective’s inner workings helps to create suspense, as the companion frequently asks the detective questions about the case (V. Nünning, 6). These questions, according to Nünning, should correspond to the questions the readership wants answered whilst reading the novel (6). These last two functions are exactly the reason why the companion cannot be allowed to have the equal intellectual capacities of the detective, otherwise the companion would not admire and consequently elevate the detective, nor would the companion need to ask the detective questions. Nünning differentiates between three types of detective novels: the Golden Age novel, the hard-boiled detective fiction and the Thriller (6-7). However, for the purpose of this thesis only the Golden Age novel and the hard-boiled detective fiction are of concern, and thus the sub-genre Thriller will not be discussed. The first sub-genre Nünning mentions is the classic detective novel, also called the Golden Age detective novel, or Clue Puzzle novel. The setting of the Golden Age detective novel is a closed environment, or literally a locked room. Exemplary settings are manors in the English countryside, boats, as for instance in Agatha Christie’s Death on the Nile, or trains, as in Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express. The fact that the murder occurs in a closed environment suggests that the murderer cannot escape and that it will not be a person from the outside. Therefore, the killer must be one of the introduced characters (V. Nünning 6-7). The Golden Age novel has a strong ludic component as the crime is presented in form of a puzzle, which has to be solved by the eccentric, almost arrogant detective (V. Nünning 6). Additionally, the detective often takes the role of the so-called armchair detective, who solves the crime by interrogating the other characters in polite conversations. In the Golden Age novels the plot is the centre of focus, as most other figures are normally stock characters and exclusively from the upper-middle class. The psychology and the
4 motivations of the killer play a key role. The structure of these novels is mostly analytical, with the murder occurring right at the beginning, followed by the investigation which is set in the present and ending with the great reveal; this is then often portrayed in a very theatrical manner. (V. Nünning 7) The second type of detective fiction is the hard-boiled fiction, also called private eye fiction (V. Nünning 7). Whereas the classic detective novel finds its roots in Great Britain, the hard-boiled fiction has an American character. The figure of the detective is mostly an aging outcast - a socially and physically threatened lone wolf. Moreover, the detective is often plagued by alcohol or drug addiction and has no supportive interpersonal relationships. The detective himself is usually the narrator (V. Nünning 8). Another important figure in the private eye fiction is the femme fatale who seduces and threatens the detective. In contrast to the rural English countryside or the luxurious boat and train voyages of the Golden Age novel, the hard-boiled fiction is set in an urban threatening context (V. Nünning 9). The focus of this type of detective fiction is not on the investigation, but on the inner workings of the detective and on the threatening situations detectives have to face, which are often characterized by violence. The language used by the narrator reflects his or her surroundings, and is thus sober, unsophisticated and includes forms of slang. Finally, the structure consists of a series of dangerous situations which the detective has to overcome contrasting the analytical structure of the Golden Age novel (V. Nünning 9). These before mentioned types of detective fiction are in constant transformation, as they have adapted to different cultures and merged into new forms. Since the 1980s there has been an increased tendency to mix elements of the Golden Age novel, the hard-boiled fiction and the Thriller. This consequently led to the creation of new sub-genres, such as the police procedural, which derived from the hard-boiled genre, but instead of featuring a loner it portrays an entire team investigating murders. Further subgenres are the historical detective novel, and the feminist version which emerged in the 1960s and depicts a female detective. Around the same period detective novels started to portray detectives from different cultural backgrounds as well (V. Nünning 13).
5 2.2. Origins of Female Detective Fiction and the Pre-Golden Age Era
Female detectives in fiction date back to the second half of the 19th century. However, when thinking about the origins and the development of crime fiction the first names that usually come to mind are Edgar Allan Poe, Conan Doyle or Dashiell Hammett, and not for instance Seeley Register or Anne Katherine Green. In fact, Merja Makinen argues in her work Feminist Popular Fiction that the common view portraying detective fiction as a male genre, namely male detectives written by men, “ignores the fact that women have consistently written detective fiction … and that the character of the woman detective … was a mainstay of detective fiction for writers of both sexes from the 1860s to the Golden Age” (92). In fact, during the 1970s and the 1980s feminist scholars such as Michelle Slung, Patricia Craig and Mary Cadogan revisited the history of crime fiction and discovered several lost works by these latter writers, who featured female detectives in their stories. In fact, according to Michelle Slung, Anna Katherine Green can be considered the “mother of detective fiction” (qtd. in Makinen 95) as she was, according to Maureen T. Reddy, the first female crime writer with her publication of Leavenworth Case in 1878 (2003 191). Further findings of the feminist revisiting by Slung, Cadogan and Craig regarding the origins and the development of crime fiction showed that both the gothic and the sensation novel were sources of inspiration for female detective fiction. In her chapter “Women Detectives”, published in Priestman’s The Cambridge Companion to Crime Fiction, Reddy argues that The Mysteries of Udolpho (1794) by Ann Radcliffe already presented several key features of today’s crime fiction. Although Emily may appear to be a passive heroine since she surrenders to the antagonist’s demands and is eventually rescued by a man, she assumes the role of the detective throughout the novel, investigating the villain’s past and present to find a way to save her aunt and escape (Reddy 2003 191). Some sensation novels such as Wilkie Collin’s The Woman in White (1860) also depicted female detectives, however, compared to the amount of female victims or female villains featured at that time the number is considerably low (Reddy 2003 191-92). Anna Katherine Green was the first female author to display a lady detective. That said, there have been novels depicting female detectives written by men prior to her publication. Hence, she was not the first to depict investigating women. In
6 fact, Makinen argues that in 1861 W.S. Hayward’s The Revelation of a Lady Detective was published, followed shortly after by Andrew Forrester’s The Lady Detective in 1864. (Makinen 94-5). According to Slung, the protagonist of The Revelation of a Lady Detective has to be considered the first female sleuth (qtd. in Makinen 95). She is a well-educated woman in her late thirties with an upper-middle class background, investigating crimes ranging from missing wills and forgeries to stolen goods and blackmail. The female detective in Lady Detective is a more subdued version of Hayward’s sleuth, she too, works similar cases and has an attachment to the Metropolitan police (Makinen 95). Towards the end of the 19th century, Anna Katherine Green published her second novel That Affair Next Door (1897), in which debuted her female detective, the elderly Miss Amelia Butterworth. Miss Butterworth is, according to Slung, the “first truly important innovation” (xxi- xxii), as she can be considered the prototype of the female elderly sleuth in the Golden Age period of detective fiction after which Patricia Wentworth’s Miss Silver and Agatha Christie’s Miss Marple were moulded (Makinen 96). These early female detectives of the 19th century were, albeit confident and independent, rather conservative with their main function being the restoration of moral order (Gavin 261). In her book Pistols and Petticoats: 175 Years of Lady Detectives in Fact and Fiction, Erika Janik describes these early female detectives as “independent, confident women, who used their knowledge of human behaviour and domestic life and female intuition to solve crime” (32). Furthermore, Janik claims that “[t]o compensate for taking on a manly profession, female characters were often overendowed by their authors with womanly charms” (Janik 32). Makinen argues that “[t]hese women are able to infiltrate places, where a man would look out of place, and employ ‘feminine’ knowledge … which often holds the vital clue to the mystery” (95). Kathleen Gregory Klein argues in her book The Woman Detective: Gender and Genre that Andrew Forrester’s protagonist is the first female detective, and that since the beginnings, these female detectives have constantly been undercut even though they proved to be intelligent and skilled. Furthermore, Gregory Klein states that although these female detectives are presented as heroes, most of the time the authors do not allow them to function as such, because they are either displayed as unwomanly women or as unprofessional underqualified detectives (1).
7 In 1915, Green created a New Woman detective in The Golden Slipper and Other Problems for Violet Strange. Unlike Miss Butterworth, Violet Strange is a young charming socialite who becomes increasingly interested in solving mysteries although she initially had prejudices about sleuthing. The reason why Violet Strange differs so much from Miss Butterworth is the emergence of the New Woman at the turn of the century which saw an increase in women’s professionalization and the rejection of the hypocrisy of marriage and prescribed gender roles. In fact, Buzwell describes the New Woman as “free-spirited and independent, educated and uninterested in marriage and children” (Buzwell) and he states that “the figure of the New Woman threatened conventional ideas about ideal Victorian womanhood” (Buzwell). Grant Allan published two stories in The Strand in 1988 which featured Miss Loys Caley and Nurse Wade. These two women, like Violet, are young, charming and independent women who travel around the world solving mysteries and crimes using their feminine intuition. Both women were to be considered New Women (Makinen 96). Nevertheless, these new female detectives, e.g. Violet Strange, Nurse Wade and Miss Loys Caley display analogous traits to the elderly Miss Butterworth, as Janik points out that “like Butterworth, Strange conforms to type outwardly whole rebelling within to live a life in defiance of expectations (Janik 86). These new female detectives continued to become popular at the beginning of the twentieth century representing female independence as for instance Richard Marsh’s female detective in The Adventures of Judith Lee published in 1916. In this book the protagonist, thanks to her lip-reading, is able to solve crimes. Another example is McD Bodkin’s Dora Myrl, who always rides on her bicycle and has the special skill of picking locks with hairpins. However, in 1909 Bodkin published The Capture of Paul Beck, and in this novel Dora Myrl is compared to Bodkin’s male detective, who appears to be more skilled and experienced than her. At the end of the novel they get married and Dora renounces sleuthing for marital bliss and motherhood (Makinen 98). A year later Baroness Orczy published Lady Molly of Scotland Yard, and following Poe’s pattern, Lady Molly only starts investigating because her husband is wrongfully accused. She is able to solve the case thanks to her feminine intuition and a good portion of luck, yet after she successfully frees her husband, she too renounces sleuthing (Makinen 98). Although these new female detectives can all be considered New Women and therefore display an increased independence and agency, they ultimately have
8 to choose between either sleuthing or marital bliss. Adrienne Gavin argues in her chapter “Feminist Crime Fiction and Female Sleuths” that especially in the beginning of the 20th century, crime novels dealt with the question of “whether a woman could embark on marriage and yet retain a detective career” (261). In her book Crime on Her Mind, Michelle Slung argues that “[t]hough these early female characters represented the then emerging ‘modern’ woman in varying degrees, they were all alike in eschewing domesticity in favour of detection” (xv-xvi). In The Woman in White Collins portrays a partnership between a male and a female detective. While the male detective is able to succeed in both his professional life as well as in his private one, Marian Halcombe, the female detective, only succeeds in her personal life (Reddy 2003 192). The situation of female detectives depicted at the turn of the century did not improve, as they were also unable to find fulfilment in both their professional and personal lives, as for instance in George R. Sims’ Dorcas Dene Detective (1897-8) and Fergus Home’s Hagar of the Pawnshop (1898), in which both the starring women detectives renounce sleuthing in order to pursue personal relationships. In fact, Patricia Craig and Mary Cadogan argue that “the apparent feminism of many of the early stories featuring women sleuths is at odds with the sentimental ending which popular authors often felt obliged to append to their works” (11-12). Nevertheless, there existed exceptions to the norm, for example Hugh C. Weir, who created his female detective Miss Madelyn Mack. Her character is strongly influenced by Sherlock Holmes, as she uses a magnifying glass and solves her cases through deduction and interpretation of evidence. Furthermore, she has an addiction to “narcotic cola berries” (Makinen 99). According to Makinen, Miss Madelyn Mack is representative of the “’exceptional woman’, a dazzling intellectual genius” (99). Thus, the novel does not end with her having to choose between marriage and career, this choice is given to her chronicler Nora Noraker instead. The common trend among these novels is that these women detectives cannot have it all, which runs along the lines of Gregory Klein’s idea that for female detectives it is always an “either-or” ending. Authors do not allow them to have a successful professional career, and the typically feminine aspirations of the 19th century such as marriage and motherhood held fast (Gregory Klein 1). In fact, Janik claims that many female detectives, especially young and attractive ones, had the tendency to choose marriage over investigating, and that several woman detectives ceased sleuthing after solving their case, thereby saving a wrongfully accused
9 relative or friend (Janik 33). The undercutting of the female detective in either one or both of her roles is, according to Gregory Klein, “encoded in theme or structure as well as in characterization” (4); furthermore, the reason why the authors struggle to reconcile the two divergent scripts of “woman” and “detective” is due to the strictly rigid formula of the genre as well as partly to the readers’ expectations, as they expect to find ratiocination, objectivity, violence, and deduction when reading a detective story. Yet, because the readers were, Gregory Klein argues, “also members of societies whose sex-role definitions allocated all the detectives’ usual talents to men” (4), the reader’s script of “detective” did not correlate with the script “woman”. Even though authors tried to combine these two scripts, the results were not satisfying enough to the readers. In fact, according to Gregory Klein:
[a]ttempts to raise the detective script to a paramount position by abjuring the conventional image of women and creating a woman detective who followed the male pattern failed as the inevitably conflicting script for women intervened; the unity of the novel’s formula was then destroyed. Similarly, attempts to raise the ‘woman’ script undercut the necessary elements of the detective formula (Gregory Klein 4)
Consequently, in order to sell books authors concluded that female detectives could not excel in both their roles; they were either second-hand detectives or unfeminine inadequate women (Gregory Klein 4). Reddy proposes an alternative reason as to why authors struggle to portray believable female detectives who are perceived as feminine and competent at the same time. According to her both female and male writers face the challenge to make the circumstances and the reasons why these women take up sleuthing seem realistic. Their traditional gender roles put women in the private sphere, and Reddy argues that solving murders is part of the public sphere. Thus, the author needs to find plausible reasons why a woman would enter this public domain (Reddy 1988 18). Adrienne Rich states that the dichotomies female/male and private/public are one of the major issues of feminist criticism because it implies that women belong in the private sphere, meaning the home, family, emotions, whereas men are considered to be more suited for the public domain, i.e. making important deals and succeeding in business (qtd. in Reddy 1988 18). Keeping this dichotomy and its implications in mind, the author of a female
10 detective novel is, thus, defying the traditional gender boundaries and reinterpreting the dichotomous vision of men and women (Reddy 1988 19).
2.3. The Golden Age and 20th Century Detective Fiction
The new upper-middle class glamourous female detectives that emerged in the early 20th century started to decrease in number after the Great War (Makinen 99). To some extent the post-war period saw a regression in the portrayal of female independence and agency within crime fiction. In the real world, however, attempts to introduce women in the police force were made. In fact, before the war women were not allowed to work for the Metropolitan Police Force, but in 1918 finally several female police officers were seen patrolling the streets of London. Nevertheless, they were not allowed to make arrests, which made it difficult for them to be taken seriously by their colleagues and the public (Makinen 99). Therefore, after only four years they were disbanded. However, one woman was chosen to take statements from victims of sexual assault. Thus, the depiction of professional detectives and police officers was more progressive in reality than in the fictional world. Several of the authors of the Golden Age period preferred their protagonists to be busy-bodies spinsters instead of professional detectives. According to Gavin, the elderly spinsters depicted during the interwar years were “[o]ften unwarrantedly seen as a retrograde step in the development of feminist crime fiction” (262). Among the authors who decided to go for an elderly spinster as their protagonists are Agatha Christie, Dorothy Sayers, Margery Allingham and Patricia Wentworth (Makinen 99). In fact, Kathleen Gregory Klein argues that “a woman’s script did not include setting up professionally in job which so clearly required acknowledged masculine virtues like physical strength, logical thinking and worldly experience. Women might be successful amateur detectives as long as they employed the more stereotypically feminine talents of gossip and intuition” (3). According to Makinen, during the Golden Age period of detective fiction the focus shifted from the persona of the detective to the crime itself, which mostly occurred in a closed setting, such as universities, country houses and cruise ships (99). Moreover, she argues that
11 “[t]he puzzle of the crime is shifted more directly on to the reader, becoming more game-like” (Makinen 99-100). The popularity of female detectives decreased in the late 1920s as in 1928 the Detection Club was founded and Ronald Knox’s Decalogue was published. The Decalogue consisted of guidelines on how a detective novel should be written. One of its main points was the rejection of feminine intuition, as the Decalogue strongly highlighted the detective’s rationality which was not compatible with gut feeling or emotions. Another main point was the ruling out of social criticism, which more often than not was one of the main themes of female detective fiction. Makinen argues that “the Detective Club, thereby consolidates the ratiocination of the classic canon. But it does so only by ignoring much of the hugely popular women’s detective fiction of the period, which relied on intuition and a knowledge of personality to solve the crimes, rather than on material evidence and rationality” (101). That said, several female crime writers were not intimidated by the strict guidelines of the Decalogue and especially in the 1930s many of the most celebrated female detective stories were published. Among these novels portraying lady detectives were Patricia Wentworth’s Grey Mask published in 1928 featuring Miss Silver, Glady’s Mitchell’s Speedy Death in 1929 introducing her woman detective Miss Bradley, as well as Agatha Christie’s Murder at the Vicarage in 1930 depicting Miss Marple’s investigations (Makinen 101). Something that these three female detective have in common is their status as elderly ladies, which according to Makinen “prevents their sexuality creating a conflict of representation with their effective ratiocination” (101). As already mentioned, one key feature of the Golden Age fiction was the focus on the crime and the plot, rather than on the characters, which is exemplified in Christie’s novels, as the characters have strong stereotypical characteristics rather than being rounded realistic personalities. Another important aspect in the Miss Marple series is that it does not include social criticism at all, Miss Marple does not express her opinions on the society she lives in, nor does she concern herself with the motives behind the crime, she just focuses on finding the murderer (Irons xii). Miss Marple and Miss Silver are both intelligent nosy gossipy women who often function as grandmotherly figures, yet they are quite moderate and conservative. In fact, Lee Horsley describes the image of Miss Marple, stating that her decorous and moderate behaviour hides her “forcefulness, shrewd intelligence,
12 and uncanny powers of perception” (245). However, Gavin argues that the spinster sleuths of the Golden Age were “[n]either noticeable nor notable to other characters” (263) and that they “regularly use underestimation of their capabilities to their advantage” (Gavin 263). While their invisibility to others could be advantageous for their investigations it simultaneously “reflects sexist and ageist cultural values” (Gavin 263). Agatha Christie is not considered a feminist by most scholars. Nevertheless, Reddy argues that there are some aspects in her novels which can be considered feminist to some extent, as for instance “the valorization [sic] of precisely those feminine qualities ridiculed in the stereotype of the irrational, intuitive, gossipy spinster” (Reddy 1988 19-20). By doing so, Agatha Christie demonstrates how advantageous and resourceful the way women think can be. Furthermore, according to Reddy, “Miss Marple’s interest in people is not mere nosiness, but evidence of a lifelong study of human nature to which she has brought, and through which she has cultivated, acuity, insight intelligence, and imagination” (Reddy 1988 20). Miss Marple has the ability to read people, to see things others do not, she has a strong awareness of hidden or realized evil within the people she talks to. Moreover, her decision to make people think she is not a threat and hiding her intelligence, is a “feminine strategy” (Reddy 1988 20), which enables her to gather the information she needs. Although Christie was able to use the stereotypically features of elderly women to her advantage, according to Horsley, she was not able to re-gender the genre, as she did not drastically challenge the male tradition (Horsley 245). Miss Bradley on the other hand, is far less conservative and more clearly voices her opinion about moral issues compared to Miss Marple and Miss Silver. In fact, she could be considered the anti-thesis of the two deferential spinsters, as she is concerned with the moral issues implicated in the crime - an aspect which goes undetected in many novels of the Golden Age fiction. Furthermore, there are substantial differences regarding her lifestyle as well, as she is a renowned psychoanalyst and a scholar. Unlike Miss Marple and Miss Silver, who never got married, Mrs. Bradley is twice widowed. She is also, using Makinen’s words “extravagant, exuberant, incisive and so old that she is ‘saurian’” (101). Unlike Christie, Wentworth and Mitchell, Dorothy Sayers created a younger and more desirable woman detective named Harriet Vane. While in Strong Poison
13 she assumes a subordinate role to Sayer’s male detective, in Gaudy Night, which was published in 1935, Harriet Vane’s agency increases as she takes on the primary role in the investigation. Although in the end it is Sayer’s male detective Lord Peter Wimsey who comes up with the solution of the crime, it is Harriet’s ratiocination which is the focus of the novel (Makinen 102). Makinen argues that
Gaudy Night, with its subtext of an intelligent woman’s role in society and the choice between marriage or an intellectual career, has fuelled a debate amongst feminist critics of detective fiction, as to whether its subversive content is proto-feminism, although many have been disappointed that the conventional dénouement remains marriage to Wimsey (102).
This demonstrates that although over 30 years have passed since the publication of female detective novels such as Dorcas Dene Detective (1897-98) and Hagar at the Pawnshop (1898), the women in the 1930s still chose marriage over their sleuthing or their professional careers. While Golden Age fiction flourished in Britain, the hard-boiled detective fiction started to established itself on the other side of the Atlantic (Makinen 99). Dashiell Hammett initiated this American tradition in 1923 when he published his short stories in Black Mask. One major change is that Hammett gave the narrating voice to his detective, rather than presenting the point of view of an observing friend, as for instance in Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes. The language and style used give an added dimension to the detective, nevertheless, his thinking processes and interpretation of evidence are not described straightforwardly, as it would take away much of the suspense and reveal the suspects to the readers. Another change was the plot itself, which became more adventurous including many dangerous events in which the detective partakes. Furthermore, the plot unfolds in urban settings, and the environment as well as the characters are marked by a strong social realism which Chandler suggested was missing in the Golden Age detective fiction (Makinen 102). The detectives of the hard-boiled tradition are usually cynical loners with moral integrity who follow their personal code of honour. The hard-boiled detective sub-genre is characterized by machoism and violence (Makinen 102), which was possibly the reason why at first only few authors decided to give an alternative view of this genre by portraying hard-boiled female detectives. In 1985
14 Lawrence Block, an American author of detective fiction, pointed out the challenges faced by female authors when creating a hard-boiled lady detective arguing that
[w]omen don’t fit well into a trench coat and a slouch hat ... The hard- boiled private eye is a special figure in American mythology. It’s a staple of the myth that he should be a cynical loner, a man at odds with society and its values. That’s not something women normally relate to. Women aren’t cynical loners – that’s not how they like to work. It seems to me that if they want to go into the profession seriously, women writers will have to change the myth itself, instead of trying to fit themselves into it (qtd. in Stasio).
Among the few crime novelists who portrayed a female hard-boiled detective were Rex Stout featuring Dol Banner in The Hand in the Glove in 1937, and Will Ousler writing about Gale Gallagher’s investigations in I Found Him Dead in 1947 (Makinen 103). In their introduction to Detective Agency: Women Rewriting the Hard-Boiled Tradition, Priscilla L. Walton and Marina Jones argue that female authors who began incorporating female detectives in the 1930s and 1940s
have strategically redirected the masculinist trajectory of the American hard-boiled detective novel … to what we would argue are feminist ends. Their writing … uses an established popular formula in order to investigate not just a particular crime but the more general offenses in which the patriarchal power structure of contemporary society itself is potentially incriminated (4).
These authors used this popular genre as a lens through which they filtered social and cultural issues. In addition, they provided a forum where these issues could be negotiated or even solved as part of their narration (Walton and Jones 4). There is truth to Walton and Jones’ statement - the hard-boiled sub-genre is suited better for social criticism than the Golden Age novel, and therefore a useful tool to bring forward feminist issues and concerns. Compared to composed and modest spinster sleuths like Amelia Butterworth and Jane Marple, the female detectives created after the late 1960s are almost opposites. According to Irons, they are “outgoing, aggressive, and self-sufficient sleuths, who have transcended generic codes and virtually rewritten the archetypal male detectives from a female perspective” (xii). Female detectives from either side
15 of the Atlantic, like Marcia Muller’s Sharon McCone and P.D. James’s Cordelia Gray heavily affected the genre with their changes (Irons xii). It is not clear what caused the rise of the female detective. Scholars formulated various theories, as for instance, Irons who argues that the death of Agatha Christie opened the door for the creation of new types of female detectives, as her detective, Miss Marple, was the quintessential model of the female sleuth (Irons xii). Others claim that the rise of female detectives was furthered by Betty Friedan’s publication of The Feminine Mystique in 1963. However, other scholars claim that the lady detective’s sudden popularity was due to the increased numbers of abuses against women, and that therefore female audiences enjoyed or were inspired by the portrayal of women who were able to defend themselves against men (Irons xii). This last thesis coincides with Gavin’s argument that “[t]he central concern of feminist crime fiction remains violence against women” (268) as the women portrayed are “captured, raped, murdered, butchered and in the hands of forensic detectives dissected into evidence” (Gavin 268). Whatever the reason behind these changes, Irons argues that from the 1960s onwards female crime writers have created women detectives, occasionally with feminist agendas that “have altered the male prototype to the extent that their detectives speak from a woman’s perspective and address the problems which women face in modern society” (Irons xii). The 1970s did not only open the door for professional female detectives in fiction, but women started to then enter the field of professional investigation in the real world as well (Horsley 243). According to Gregory Klein, it was not until the 1970s that women writers presented a “consciously articulated response to social change by women who challenge the sexist assumptions of hero formation apparently required by the formulaic demands of this fiction” (5). It suggests that the rebuttal and criticism of the traditional hero formula, which was characterized by typically male qualities for over a century, was according to Gregory Klein, the consequence of the social criticism of the female detective novels of the previous decade, as well as the increased number of female officers and professional women detectives in the 1970s (5). Horsley proposes that these changes furthered female empowerment and “female subjectivity” (243), which were absent in the novels published in earlier decades (Horsley 243). A pioneer in the field of empowering female detective fiction was Sara Paretsky, who published her first female crime novel in 1982. She is one of the most important female detective fiction writers in
16 the US, where she published several novels starring her female protagonist V.I. Warshawski. Moreover, Paretsky is very involved in the women’s cause, founding Sisters in Crime, a group which supports other women and helps them to further their careers in the field of mystery writing, as well as trying to correct the shortcomings and the inequality in the treatment of women (Irons xiii). One of the major themes in Paretsky’s novels is the sexual role of women and its implications, which is almost never questioned in crime novels featuring male detectives (qtd. in Irons xiii). Paretsky’s novels illustrate several of the changes that have occurred since the 1970s and the time when a woman assumed the role of the hard-boiled detective (Irons xiii). Paretsky’s novels focus on community, female friendship and reciprocating support, whereas the hard-boiled male detective is known for being a loner standing outside of society. Instead of using old ideologies and codes, Paretsky established new ones, which are loosely influenced by the male detectives of the hard-boiled tradition of the 1930s and 1940s (Irons xii). The male hard-boiled detectives are usually loners. However, Paretsky’s woman detective V.I. Warshawsky is not a secluded character at all. She has instead a considerably strong sense of community. Because she does not have any immediate family members, she highly values female friendship and often works with her friends as well. According to Gregory Klein, Paretsky’s detective displays traits of what Carol Gilligan named “ethic of responsibility” (qtd. in Irons xiii), which implies that the duty of the detective is not only to solve crimes and restore order, but also to create a sense of community among the other characters (Irons xiii). In fact, Irons states that Paretsky’s fictional characters inhibit the real world, and she shows the reader the powerful effect of the support a community can give (xv). Another example of Paretsky’s rewriting the formula of the genre is the confrontation between her detective, V.I. Warshawski, and the criminals, who are most of the time male. Given that she is a woman, she is often underestimated by male criminals, not being seen as their equal, which is a mistake they have to pay for in the end as she outsmarts them (Irons xiv). Sara Paretsky was not the only author in the process of reshaping the idea in readers’ and viewers’ minds that the urban detective hero does not necessarily have to be a man. In fact, since the 1980s female detectives have appeared on television, beginning with Jessica Fletcher in Murder She Wrote, followed by V.I.
17 Warshawski: The Movie, and in the 1990s Prime Suspect starring Jane Tennison (Irons 2014, xi). Jane Tennison started a trend showing female detectives on British television. Prime Suspect exemplifies the struggles female detectives have to face in the professional world, and how she has to gain the respect of her clients and her colleagues. Even though she excels at her job, her skills and abilities are constantly questioned simply because she is a woman. Furthermore, the series demonstrates the consequences that her job has on her private life. In the beginning of the series Jane Tennison has a boyfriend, but their relationship crumbles as he feels she invests all her energy in her job and neglects their relationship. The series implies, that if the roles were inverted, a woman would accept the demands of the detective job (Irons xvi-xvii). Makinen argues that “[t]he bestselling detective novels in the 1990s accept women in places of high office … Interrogations of class, gender and race sit alongside puzzle plots, police procedurals unquestioning of the law and order enforced, and crime exploring the psyche of the psychopath” (104). Anne Cranny-Francis argues that recently with an ever-increasing number of women inhabiting the professional world, it is less challenging for authors of female detective fiction to create a plausible context for their female investigators (70). The process of professionalization of the 20th century woman is not the only reason why contextualizing a female detective has become easier, but that the inclusion of social criticism in female detective novels, as well as the fluidity of the genre seeing that the 1980s have facilitated crime writers to embed their female detectives in realistic contexts.
2.4. Typology of Female Detectives
The first type of female detective is the amateur sleuth. Roughly 30 years prior to Agatha Christie’s publication of her first novel featuring Miss Marple, Anna Katherine Green published That Affair Next Door in 1897. Green’s protagonist, Amelia Butterworth, is according to Janik, “[f]iftyish, upper middle class, and respectable, she’s anxious to be of help where help is needed” (Janik 55). She never stops asking questions. In That Affair Next Door, the inspector tends to be annoyed by Butterworth’s interference, claiming that her methods are incorrect. Nevertheless,
18 their methods are quite similar, as Janik points out that they “[b]oth use deductive and inductive reasoning and act on intuition” (56). Instead of feeling defeated by the inspector’s disdainful attitude, Miss Butterworth takes it as a challenge. In fact, Janik argues that “Butterworth exercises all her cunning in dealing with the police and in locating evidence she believes they have overlooked. Rather than relying on others for clues or to supply missing information, Butterworth takes direct action, and proves her mettle in dealing with women, in particular” (56). Furthermore, Amelia Butterworth’s inquisitive nature, as well as her attention to detail and her knowledge of human behaviour, which by many is interpreted as nosiness and gossip, help her to solve her cases (Janik 63). Miss Butterworth is determined to solve her case without the help of men. Even though Miss Butterworth was only featured in three novels, according to Janik, “Green’s sleuth broke stereotypical boundaries for women and create the model for the intelligent spinster detective, still active to this day” (57). As already mentioned before, some authors chose to put female detectives into male positions without contextualizing their decision, whereas others chose a more subversive role for their lady sleuths. Christie, for instance, used female stereotypes in her favour. Exemplifying this is Miss Marple who starts investigating because she is thought to be a nosy, gossipy, elderly lady. Furthermore, she enjoys birdwatching, which explains her carrying binoculars everywhere she goes. One of her main sources for gathering information is her gardener, who works for many people in the village, hence he knows all the gossip of the town. Christie uses the stereotypical gender roles in her portrayal of Miss Marple to her advantage, which leads to the suspects not feeling threatened by her questioning, which is interpreted as being the nosiness of an elderly lady (Reddy 1988 19). To solve crimes, Jane Marple uses a “combination of intuition and intrusiveness” (Reddy 1988 19), which stands in strong contrast to Hercule Poirot’s exclusively rational methods (Reddy 1988 19). Miss Marple lives and works within a rigid, strongly conventional world, which heavily resembles Victorian England. She works apart from her local police force, and because of her gender and age she is considered unsuitable for the job (Irons x). Horsley argues that, spinster sleuths such as Miss Marple are strongly bound to the Victorian period or the late 19th century England, and even though she and her sleuthing sisters have contributed to feminizing the genre, their appearance and their uncombative approach make it seem unrealistic for them to go out of their
19 comfort zone and take up arms alongside hard-boiled detectives such as V.I. Warshawski (Horsley 245). The 1980s saw the rise of the second type of female detective, namely the academic or scholarly detective. One of the most celebrated authors portraying a female detective within the academe is Carolyn Heilbrun (penname Amanda Cross). For Heilbrun gender issues are vital in her work as a scholar, and in her crime novels they became increasingly important as the series progressed, shifting the focus slowly from the murder mystery on to feminist issues (Reddy 1988 49); yet there is one invariable in all of the novels, that is, the victim is always female and the criminal always male (Reddy 1988 49). Death in a Tenured Position, which was published in 1981, is the most exemplary novel of Heilbrun’s feminist agenda, as in this novel Heilbrun gives three possible responses to the exclusion of women: firstly, by imitating men, secondly by avoiding men entirely and patriarchal institutions, and thirdly by bonding with women while working in patriarchal institutions and hoping to be able to make changes from within (Reddy 1988 49). In her first novel In the Last Analysis, published in 1964, the protagonist, professor Kate Fansler is modelled after the guidelines of the Detection Club, even though being a woman. Reddy argues that Kate is “nearly a female incarnation of Wimsey”, Heilbrun’s male detective (1988 50), as she is “somewhat eccentric, well- read, a believer in honor and justice” (Reddy 1988 50). In fact, in this novel, Kate’s gender does not even matter, as she is depicted in appearance to be a female but having all the characteristics of a male detective (Reddy 1988 53-54). Thus, Heilbrun started by accepting the genre conventions, inserting a woman in a male role within a patriarchal context (Reddy 1988 53). However, according to Reddy, in the course of the novels Kate’s character develops as she “moves from the position of ‘honorary man’ to more androgynous, autonomous being to woman who identifies as a woman and with other women” (Reddy 1988 54). As her perception of herself changes, the way she perceives the victims and the killer changes as well (Reddy 1988 54). A further step into the direction of feminism occurs in The Theban Mysteries, where Heilbrun decides to kill off Esther Jablon. This act of murdering Esther represents a cleansing and the destruction of women, who for Heilbrun, embodied archaic and old-fashioned models of female behaviour (Reddy 1988 62). The Question of Max shows to what extent men would go to maintain the male privileges
20 within a patriarchal society, depicting a misogynist feminist-hating character who openly admits to be willing to destroy women (Reddy 1988 62). This novel almost functions as an apology for Esther’s behaviour in the previous novel, reiterating that if a person, male or female, is surrounded by a patriarchal woman-hating society, this person can only turn out to be this way (Reddy 1988 62). In his chapter “Diversifying the Viewpoint: Gender”, Stephen Knight argues that Heilbrun’s later novels such as No Word from Winifred can be considered fully feminist works, as “the emphasis lies on the construction and recognition of female identities and biographies” (166). Furthermore, its central theme is female empowerment through female friendship as well as the consequent male fear of a female united front (Reddy 1988 50). The third type of woman detective is the female police officers. Reddy argues that police departments are hierarchically organized and consist mostly of male police officers, making it that much harder for women (Reddy 1988 70). The number of fictional police officers featured in novels is rather low, and in 1985 Dell Shannon, the author of the Lieutenant Mendoza series of the LAPD, stated that “women writers avoid the field because police work is still predominantly a male profession” (qtd. in Stasio). Nevertheless, Anne Winegate (pseudonyms Martha Webb and Lee Martin) published several novels featuring female police officers while adding a feminist twist (Stasio). In 1975 the former police officer Marie Cirile published Detective Marie Cirile: Memoirs of a Police Officer. According to Reddy, Cirile’s memoir it is a “clear-eyed criticism of a police department’s inequitable treatment of male and female officers” (Reddy 1988 70-71). In her memoir Cirile argues that female police officers were discriminated because of their gender. Cirile claims that they were “tolerated, or worse yet treated as pets” (Cirile 13). Female police officers would always get conventionally female assignments, as for instance, guarding female prisoners and witnesses (Reddy 1988 71). Furthermore, she claims that men would have higher incomes than women, and that they were often told by their superiors that they were not welcome in their squads (Cirile 13). One of the main problems of this novel is Cirile’s response to this discrimination; instead of forming groups of women and supporting one another, Cirile internalizes the hatred of male officers against female ones. In fact, Cirile’s memoir is not only a strong criticism of the inequitable treatment of women, but it
21 also criticizes other women (Reddy 1988 72). She depicts the other female police officers as not even trying to compete on the same level as men, since they were assumed to not be skilled enough and too feminine. (Reddy 1988 72). Although Cirile questions these women’s attitude, she does not realize that her own attitude is, according to Reddy, “self-defeating and equally male-engendered” (Reddy Sisters 72), as she is “measuring herself in terms of her difference from other women” (Reddy 1988 72). Reddy argues that the brotherhood of police departments will try to exclude female intruders, and that this behaviour turns female officers into male officers in a female body (Reddy 1988 73). Another type of woman detectives is the hard-boiled female detective. To some extent female hard-boiled detectives are very similar to their male counterparts. For instance, male hard-boiled detectives report extensively on food, clothes, bathing and more (Reddy 1988 94). Similarly to their male counterparts, female detectives of the hard-boiled tradition consume a lot of alcohol, talk tough, and many carry a gun (Reddy 1988 95). Reddy argues that “what James does is adapt a pre-existing, distinctly female pattern to a revised version of the imported hard-boiled detective novel, laying the groundwork for future women writers” (Reddy 1988 101). Shortly after her publications between 1982 and 1987 many American writers started to create female hard-boiled detectives. In fact, in an interview Sara Paretsky, creator of the lady detective V.I. Warshawski stated: “I was determined to write a hard-boiled sleuth who was both a woman and a complete professional, someone who could operate successfully in a tough milieu and not lose her femininity” (qtd. in Stasio). James was the first one to show what prejudices and inequities a woman would have to face if she were a professional investigator. P.D. James, as well as other authors, highlight that these professional female investigators are often considered to be unsuitable for this profession, since it requires skills such as action taking and decision making - skills traditionally associated with men, not women (Reddy 1988 101-102). Because female private eyes are met with scepticism and prejudices, a few female hard-boiled detectives prefer not to reveal their name such as V.I. Warshawski. She always uses her initials. According to Reddy “[t]his struggle over the name of the detective acquires increasing significance with each repetition, eventually coming to stand for larger struggles, most specifically women’s fight for equality and autonomy and women’s
22 ongoing attempts to fashion from male-made language expression capable of reflecting female experience” (Reddy 1988 90). Like their male counterparts, these female protagonists do not have any immediate family, they are either orphans, estranged or even cut off from their families because they do not approve of their decision of becoming detectives (Reddy 1988 104). While male hard-boiled detectives seem to choose to be loners and appreciate their isolation, female ones enjoy their independence and freedom on one hand, but also seek and cherish connections with other people on the other (Reddy 1988 105). Another aspect that female authors revised in the hard-boiled tradition is the approach to guns and the meaning of violence. In fact, while male hard-boiled detectives carry guns and are not afraid to use them, the female reinterpretations, on the other hand, prefer using their wit, intellect and their physical strength to get out of dangerous situations. Even though most of them do carry guns, they almost never use them, and if they do it is in self-defence (Reddy 1988 113). The lesbian detective is the last type of female investigator. In Sally R. Munt’s work Murder by the Book? Feminism and the Crime Novel, she argues that lesbian detective fiction really emerged in the 1980s (120). Both Munt and Reddy argue that lesbian detective novels focus more on identity and sexuality than on solving crimes. In fact, the plots of these novels revolve around the protagonist accepting herself and finding her identity (Munt 120; Reddy 1988 129). Lesbian detective novels frequently include a coming-out to family and friends. Lesbian detectives resemble female hard-boiled detectives, since they, too, are estranged from their families, and value their freedom. Nevertheless, the community is vital to them in providing mutual support and discussing shared experiences (Reddy 1988 129). According to Reddy lesbian crime fiction displays key features of the Bildungsroman as well:
several of these novels follow strikingly similar patterns, paralleling the hero’s investigation of a crime or mystery with her investigation of her own psyche. As the detective assembles the clues to the mystery, she also assembles clues to her sexuality, with the revelation of the solution to the puzzle and the revelations of the detective’s… lesbianism presented as complementary (Reddy 1988 123).
This complementary investigation occurs, for instance, in Vicky McConnell’s 1982 novel Mrs. Porter’s Letters and in Barbara Wilson’s 1984 fiction Murder in the
23 Collective, published in 1984, as both detectives, at the beginning of the novel identify themselves as heterosexual and are heartbroken from previous relationships with men (Reddy 1988 123-124). The protagonist of Mrs. Porter’s Letters, Nyla Wade just recently divorced from her husband and chooses celibacy for the time, but during the course of the novel she finds herself attracted to a woman and starts questioning her heterosexuality, and eventually comes to the conclusion that she is homosexual. Pam Nilsen, the detective of Murder in the Collective, undergoes an even more drastic transformation, as she starts off being somewhat homophobic but then finds herself being attracted to a woman. A shared feature of these novels is that the reader knows that these women are homosexual before the detectives themselves do (Reddy 1988 125). Both of these women follow a pattern that Bonnie Zimmermann defines as “the recognition of emotional and/or sexual feelings for another woman, the realization that that love is condemned by society, the acceptance of a lesbian identity either physically … or psychologically, and, in contemporary feminist novels, the affirmation of one’s lesbianism to the outside world” (Zimmermann 245).
24 3. The Representation of Women in Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes Stories
3.1. Sherlock Holmes – Detective Extraordinaire
Based on the characteristics of detective fiction established by Vera Nünning, it becomes notable that the Sherlock Holmes stories mirror several of the features she uses to describe traditional crime fiction. Firstly, she argues that the detective is an eccentric figure (V. Nünning 5), which undeniably applies to Sherlock Holmes’ nature. Secondly, the detective works outside the police force (V. Nünning 5), which again is a feature that can be ascribed to Sherlock Holmes, as he himself points out several times that he serves as a consultant for the police and is not officially employed by the police. Although he helps the police with complex cases, he works independently. Thirdly, Nünning claims that the detective is always accompanied by a side-kick, which is reflected in the relationship between Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson displayed in Conan Doyle’s stories. Dr Watson is Holmes’ loyal companion who accompanies him on every adventure (6). Typical features of the narration are mirrored in Conan Doyle’s writing style as well, since the narrator of the stories is the side-kick (V. Nünning 6). Consequently, the reader, as well as Dr Watson himself, is oblivious to the detective’s train of thought. Therefore, his suspects, his interpretation of evidence, and mostly how he comes to his conclusions are things only accessible to the reader when the detective decides to explain himself to his side-kick, and in this way creating suspense throughout the novel (V. Nünning 6). Regarding the sub-genres of detective fiction, elements of the Golden Age detective fiction are arguably present in the Sherlock Holmes stories. One of the features Vera Nünning mentions is the ludic component of this sub-genre. This game-like component is an essential part of Conan Doyle’s work and its idea is literally included in one of Sherlock’s most famous lines “[t]he game is afoot” (Conan Doyle 636). Another element traditionally associated with Golden Age detective fiction is the importance of the inner-workings and motivations of the villains (V. Nünning 6). In the Sherlock Holmes stories, the perpetrator’s motives are in most cases essential for Sherlock to solve the cases. Furthermore, the importance of
25 motive is highlighted by the detective’s occasional decision to let the perpetrator escape. This happens when Sherlock Holmes sympathizes more with the criminal than the victim, because he thinks that the motive justifies the action. Although Conan Doyle’s stories mirror several key characteristics of the Golden Age detective fiction, they display features of the hard-boiled tradition as well. Nünning argues that one of the most defining features of the hard-boiled detective fiction is the urban setting (7), which again applies to the Sherlock Holmes stories, as they are set in London. Another element of this sub-genre is the depiction of violent situations, which is not central but indeed partly present in Doyle’s work. According to Nünning, one of the key characteristics of the hard-boiled genre is the isolation of the protagonist (V. Nūnning 7). Although Sherlock Holmes is accompanied in his adventures by Dr Watson and taken care of by Mrs Hudson, it can be argued that he is very selective about the people he surrounds himself with, and since there are only two characters of importance in Holmes’ life he is to some extent a loner. The reason why it can be argued that Sherlock Holmes prefers isolation is due to his almost non-existent relationship with his family and his determination to exclude any type of romantic partnership with a woman, as can be seen in the following quote:
I had never heard him refer to his relations, and hardly ever to his own early life. This reticence upon his part had increased the somewhat inhuman effect which he produced upon me, until sometimes I found myself regarding him as an isolated phenomenon, a brain without a heart, as deficient in human sympathy as he was preeminent in intelligence. His aversion to women and his disinclination to form new friendships were both typical of his unemotional character (Conan Doyle 435).
From this quote it becomes clear that Sherlock Holmes values his cool logic over relationships, arguing that relationships distract from rationality, and are therefore, according to Sherlock Holmes, of less importance. In fact, in her article “Sherlock Holmes Codes the Social Body”, Rosemary Jann argues that Sherlock Holmes “has a brain like a great storehouse of apparently miscellaneous and irrelevant facts, available for the moment when by retrieving and then ‘focusing’ them, he will reveal them to be parts of a pre-existing system of meaning waiting to be discovered and utilized to solve crimes” (Jann 690). Thus, romantic relationships with women or
26 casual friendships with others fall into the category of “irrelevant facts” (Jann 690). Those are not essential for crime-solving, and therefore are, in Sherlock’s eyes, dispensable. Sherlock Holmes openly admits that he does not think highly of women. In fact, in their book The Bedside, Bathtub & Armchair Companion to Sherlock Holmes, Dick Riley and Pam McAllister argue that Sherlock Holmes was “inclined to boast of his disdain for women” (188). From the reader’s standpoint, one might come to the conclusion that Sherlock Holmes was a misogynist based on statements such as “I am not a whole-souled admirer of womankind, as you are aware, Watson” (Conan Doyle 801), or “Women are never to be entirely trusted – not the best of them” (Conan Doyle 129), and already in the quote further above, Watson mentions Sherlock’s aversion to women (Conan Doyle 435). Further evidence of his dislike of women is, according to Riley and McAllister, his utter disinterest in women. It is interesting how Sherlock Holmes always boasts that the answer lies in observation, yet he fails to observe women, which is exemplified in a short passage in The Sign of Four in which Watson points out to Sherlock how attractive Mary Morstan is, to which Sherlock Holmes replies: “[i]s she? … I did not observe” (Conan Doyle 96). However, it would be erroneous to say that Sherlock Holmes is a misogynist; in fact, he arguably values various female qualities. One reason is based on statements of his such as: “I have seen too much not to know that the impression of a woman may be more valuable than the conclusion of an analytical reasoner” (Conan Doyle 234), “I value a woman’s instinct in such matters” (Conan Doyle 1088), or when referring to Mary Morstan “I think she is one of the most charming young ladies I ever met and might have been most useful in such work as we have been doing. She had a decided genius that way, witness the way in which she preserved that Agra plan from all the other papers of her father” (Conan Doyle 157) or “[y]ou are certainly a model client. You have the correct intuition” (Conan Doyle 96). All of these statements show a certain respect and/or admiration towards women and their disposition. Another reason that supports the argument that Sherlock Holmes is not a misogynist is his treatment of various women. There are several occasions in which Sherlock Holmes shows compassion and sympathy towards his female clients or victims, as for instance with Un-named widow in “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton”. Sherlock Holmes understands her motives, and sympathizes
27 with her, and therefore does not reveal her name to the police even though she has committed a murder. A similar outcome occurs in “The Adventure of the Second Stain”, as Holmes does not turn over Lady Hope to the police, though he knows she had stolen diplomatic documents. Therefore, Sherlock Holmes is not only a champion of justice, but to some extent of women as well. When Mary Morstan tells Holmes about her case, he states “[y]ou are a wronged woman, you shall have justice” (Conan Doyle 95).
3.2. From the Angel in the House to the “New Woman”
During the Victorian era, women were considered inferior to men from a biological perspective. In fact, Henry Mausdley argued in 1874 that women had a “finite amount of energy” (Shanley 5), and since reproduction consumed an extensive portion of their energy, there simply was not any left to aspire to a higher education or pursue a profession (Shanley 6). In her article “Reevaluating Female ‘Inferiority’: Sarah Grand versus Charles Darwin”, Patricia Murphy argues that during the Victorian age a white European man “represented the pinnacle of the evolutionary process, psychological theory held that the female represented a lesser developmental stage through which the male passed in his progression to maturity“ (222). Therefore, a woman’s role and function was to pass on these traits to their children (Murphy 222). The decades between 1820 and 1880 were characterized by the cult of domesticity. The distinction between male and female was not only amplified by the law approving of Mausdely’s scientific findings, but also by the ever-growing industrial capitalism, which led to the cult of domesticity and ultimately characterized the decades. Since men had to work away from their homes the divide between women and men increased (Shanley 6-7). As a result, according to Shanley, “[t]he ideology of the home encouraged women of all classes to tend to domestic duties and to make the household a haven from the turmoil and competition of the marketplace” (7). Women’s main aspirations were having a good reputation, finding a husband and being the Angel in the House. Due to the cult of domesticity, women’s main
28 aspirations were to have a good reputation in order to find a husband, as wells as being a domestic goddess - the so-called Angel in the House - taking care of the household, their husbands and their children. Isokoski argues that “[s]ince a woman’s whole function was limited to symbolizing the virtue of her family, any deviation from it or even a suggestion that a woman had somehow jeopardized her and her family’s reputation could harm her position in society” (69) and thus compromise her search for a husband. Therefore, they had to be chaste, innocent and pure, and from an early age they were brought up to keep their sexual impulses hidden. Adultery was considered the worst sin a woman could commit (Isokoski 70). In fact, there are only a few cases in the Sherlock Holmes adventures that displays a woman committing adultery is in “The Adventure of the Veiled Lodger” and “The Adventure of the Cardboard Box”, where Mary Browner, encouraged by her sister Sarah Cushing, has an extramarital affair (Isoksoki 75). Women were either seen as extreme prude angels or overly sensual devils like Irene Adler for instance, and any form of sexual intercourse outside of a marriage was considered prostitution (Isokoski 70). Men had the power to decide in public and financial matters. In fact, in her article “Victorian Values and Women in Public and Private”, Digby argues that the mentality of the Victorian period was characterized by a broad distinction between men and women, which dictated that men occupied the public sphere, whereas women were confined to the domestic one (195). Thus, everything non-related to the household and the upbringing of the children was the responsibility of men, and women were not allowed to interfere in these public matters (Digby 195). Conan Doyle shows in “The Adventure of the Second Stain” that women did not know how to act within the public sphere, as Lady Trelawney Hope explains:
I could not, Mr. Holmes, I could not! On the one side seemed certain ruin, on the other, terrible as it seemed to take my husband’s paper, still in a matter of politics I could not understand the consequences, while in a matter of love and trust they were only too clear to me. I did it, Mr. Holmes! I took an impression of his key. This man, Lucas, furnished a duplicate. I opened his despatch-box [sic], took the paper, and conveyed it to Godolphin Street (Conan Doyle 664).
29 Her explanation shows that she had no idea of the consequences stealing an important political document could have, because, as she states, she knows about love and not about politics. This limited female agency was not only confined to public and private matters, but also in regards to the women’s rights within the domestic sphere, as married women had very few rights compared to their husbands, and especially upon marrying women lost their property and wealth. In fact, in her book A Widening Sphere: Changing Roles of Victorian Women, Martha Vicinus argues that “[i]n the eyes of the common law, married women had no identity apart from their husbands … Where property was concerned, this meant in practice that a husband assumed legal possession or control of all property that belonged to his wife upon marriage” (4-5). Therefore, husbands took over the women’s finances since, from a legal point of view, husband and wife were one entity. As women were considered less intelligent and less competent according to Mausdley’s findings, it was the husband who took on the superior role within the marriage and therefore, women were completely dependent on their husband’s decisions (Digby 5). Several of the Sherlock Holmes stories demonstrates the lengths men would go to in order to maintain this superior position, as is the case in “The Adventure of the Speckled Band”, “The Adventures of the Copper Beeches” and in “A Case of Identity”. Women did not have rights over their finances nor over their bodies. Consequently, spousal rape or sexual violence was not a reason for men to be sued, as it was seen as one of the conjugal duties of a woman to comply to their husbands’ wishes, since as Joanna Bourke points out in her article “Violence, Marital Guidance, and Victorian Bodies: An Aesthesiology“, that the "’marital rape exemption’ ... meant that a wife was presumed to have granted lifelong consent to sexual intercourse with her husband“ (421). Isokoski argues that women were “treated as private property that can be sold and bought by men” (58), which is exemplified in Conan Doyle’s “The Noble Bachelor”, where the marriage between Hatty Doran and Lord St. Simon is portrayed as a trade, as Lord St. Simon has a title but no money, and Hatty Doran, on the other hand, is wealthy yet without a title (Isokoski 58-59). Facing these inequalities, women started to become more active in public matters and started to fight for what they believed was right. Consequently, feminist groups began to form, and they were strongly influenced by abolitionist ideas
30 coming from the United States. Thus, they founded organizations to support slaves (Caine 54). Claire Midgley argues that “abolitionist activity both expanded the range of women’s public involvement and provided women with ‘the skills, self-confidence, connections, sense of collective ideas, and commitment to public and political activism’ that provided the basis for organized feminism” (qtd. In Caine 54). Although many prominent men and women fought for the abolition of the institution of slavery and the transatlantic slave trade, they did not necessarily reject the idea of the hierarchy between the sexes. Thus, women were permitted to work within these abolitionist organizations, but they always received minor roles, and therefore, they were not able bring their ideas and petition to the Parliament (Caine 55). After having formed a shared identity, these feminist groups started to fight not only for the slaves’ rights, but for their own rights as well. They organized protests and wrote essays and books about the inequalities between men and women, leading to the Infant Custody Act in 1839, the Divorce Act in 1857 and the Married Woman’s Property Act in 1870 – as well as the revision of the Married Woman’s Property Act in 1882 (Shanley 8). The Married Woman’s Property Act consisted in the control of married women over their earnings, as well as over inherited property (Jenainati and Groves 50). Among the key figures in the advancement of feminist ideas were Mary Wollstonecraft, Matthew Carey, Harriet Taylor Mill, Stuart Mill, Lady Caroline Norton and many others. The turning point for Victorian feminism was the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848. This convention was a result of Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s and Lucretia Mott’s voyage to England to attend the World Anti-Slavery Convention, to which they were not permitted access because of their sex. Upon their return to New York, they organized the Seneca Fall Convention for female suffragists and liberal men (Jenainati and Groves 50-53). According to Jenainati and Groves “[t]he aim was to discuss issues related to equality in education, marriage and property laws” (53). Elizabeth Cady Stanton drafted the “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions” which mirrored in form the Declaration of Independence (Kerber 115). The growing female interest and involvement in public matters at the end of the 19th century saw the emergence of the so-called New Woman (Richardson and Willis 5). The New Woman established herself alongside the decadent dandies, and according to Richardson and Willis, even though at a first glance they did not have much in common, they both “overtly challenged the dominant sexual codes of the
31 Victorian era” (5). The fin-de-siècle was a time of change, and feminist women took the opportunity to question everything that an ideal Victorian woman embodied. In fact, Cunningham argues that during these decades feminists’ focus shifted from “specific political and legal questions towards the formulation of a new morality, a new code of behaviour and sexual ethics. A complete reassessment of the female character was called for, sweeping aside the old clichés and moral certitudes and replacing them with a questioning frankness” (Cunningham 3). In fact, everything that was associated with Victorian propriety and morals was about to change: topics such as sex were no longer considered taboo, marriage was not a woman’s main aspiration, on the contrary, the institution was harshly criticized, and education became more accessible to women. Thus, women entered the professional world and started to become financially independent (Cunningham 2). It can be argued that in the Sherlock Holmes canon Irene Adler is the character that is most representative of the New Woman-concept, as she is an independent, smart opera singer and refuses to bend to the will of men.
3.3. The Oppression of Women due to Victorian Morals and the Patriarchal System
Several female victims, such as Mrs. Trelawney Hope and Mary Sutherland are representatives of women’s oppression of the Victorian period. In the Sherlock Holmes stories, this oppression arguably works in two ways: women are either being oppressed by their controlling fathers or husbands, or they are being sexually repressed because Victorian codes do not allow any form of explicit sexual reference in public. Consequently, these female victims are either manipulated by patriarchal figures, or blackmailed with letters containing injudicious content. In the present day, these injudicious letters could cause a divorce, or a minor scandal, but in the Victorian era, where a good reputation was priceless, their publication could, in the worst case, lead to death. Several of Sherlock’s female clients seek his help because they are blackmailed by means of an imprudent letter written to a former or present lover. This was particularly scandalous at a time where the reputation of a woman was her most valuable asset and adultery the worst sin a woman could commit. It can be
32 argued that these blackmailing episodes are best exemplified in “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton” and “The Adventure of the Second Stain”. In “The Adventure of the Second Stain” Mrs. Trelawney Hope is blackmailed with a letter she had written before she was even married. Nevertheless, she is afraid that this letter could ruin her marriage, as well as Lady Hope’s and her husband’s reputations (Danielová 39). Therefore, she was willing to steal an important document from her husband and give it to the blackmailer Eduardo Lucas (Danielová 36). “The Adventure of Charles Augustus Milverton” also displays how women were blackmailed because of past actions that would not have been in line with the Victorian ideals and standards. As women had to adhere to the strict and oppressive rules of the Victorian period regarding intimacy and sexuality, men such as Charles Augustus Milverton could take advantage of the women’s position and blackmail them for their improper behaviour. In fact, Poole argues that Milverton had so much power because his “leverage over these women stems from the very moral nature of Victorian times, when sexuality was to be enjoyed in private, but never discussed or written about publicly” (Poole 18). Mr Milverton’s blackmailing technique ultimately cost several lives, as for instance one of the blackmailed women’s husband committed suicide because he could not live with his wife’s stained reputation (Poole 18-19). It is arguable that Conan Doyle to some extent denounces this male power over women, as he depicts Charles Augustus Milverton as one of the worst criminals. In fact, Sherlock Holmes describes him as the “worst man in London” (Conan Doyle 572) and the “king of all blackmailers” (Conan Doyle 572), adding “[h]eaven help the man, and still more the woman, whose secret and reputation come into power of Milverton!” (Conan Doyle 572). It is based on these descriptions of Charles Augustus Milverton that Conan Doyle arguably despised how women could be manipulated and taken advantage of due to the oppressive system dictating female propriety. Further evidence of Conan Doyle’s denouncement of female repression is shown in Sherlock Holmes’ reaction to Milverton’s death. Instead of surrendering the murderer to the police, Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson burn all the letters written by women in Milverton’s possession. Several of Conan Doyle’s stories display the women’s limited agency in taking control over their own finances. These issues are exemplified by Mary Sutherland in “A Case of Identity”, as well as in “The Adventure of the Copper
33 Beeches” and in “The Adventure of the Speckled Band”. In “A Case of Identity”, Mary Sutherland inherited a considerable sum from her late mother, over which she had no control because she was a passive woman. It was her stepfather’s responsibility to take care of her finances. Yet once Mary Sutherland would marry, her husband would decide over her inheritance. Thus, Windibank, Mary’s stepfather tried to isolate her from society, in order to prevent her from meeting any possible suitors. When he realised that Mary would not obey him forever, he concocts a plan to make sure that she would not get engaged and he disguises himself as Hosmer Angel, Mary’s future fiancé. Nevertheless, on their wedding day Hosmer Angel disappears. According to Poole, this story is representative of female oppression, women’s sexuality, as well as the inequality between men and women. Mary Sutherland is an obedient daughter and does not question the hierarchy within her family (Poole 18). Yet Poole points out the irony that her one act of disobedience only increases her stepfather’s control over her, pushing her back into the position of the obedient girl and preventing her from becoming an independent woman (18). Poole argues that Windibank got engaged to his stepdaughter knowing for certain that if her fiancé disappeared she would wait for him to come back, and not look for other suitors (Poole 18). Poole argues that by pointing out that Mary Sutherland would wait for her fiancée, Doyle highlights the character’s passivity and impossibility of taking action (18). The patriarchal figures in “The Adventure of the Copper Beeches” and in “The Adventure of the Speckled Band” go to even more extreme lengths to ensure their daughters or stepdaughters’ inheritances (Isokoski 61). In “The Adventure of the Copper Beeches”, Jephro Rucastle imprisons his daughter Alice to prevent her from marrying and accessing her late mother’s inheritance. A maid in the story states that “Miss Alice had rights of her own by will, but she was so quiet and patient that she never said a word about them, but just left everything in Mr. Rucastle’s hands” (Conan Doyle 331). Nevertheless, Alice’s future husband might not have been so patient. Therefore, he hires a governess, Violet Hunter, to impersonate his daughter in order to fend off Alice’s fiancé. Violet is suspicious of her working conditions and goes to Sherlock Holmes for advice. In “The Adventure of the Speckled Band”, the patriarchal figure even takes it one step further by murdering one stepdaughter before her wedding and attempting to kill the second one once engaged, as well. Helen Stoner seeks Sherlock’s advice, because of the mysterious circumstances of
34 her sister’s death and her own decreasing health. Holmes suspects their stepfather, Doctor Grimesby Roylott, because once his stepdaughters got married, he would not have access to and control over their inheritance. In her chapter “Unable to Save Herself: An Examination of Women as Persons in Three Stories of the Sherlock Holmes Canon”, Vicki Delany argues that “Helen Stoner is the perfect illustration of the idea of Victorian womanhood. Submissive, controlled, unable to make a fuss. Unable to save herself. Had she not broken away from expectations and travelled alone to London to meet with Sherlock Holmes, she would have died” (7). These two short stories exemplify what men were willing to do to maintain their superior position and not to lose their daughters’ inheritance to another man. However, Isokoski argues that although female characters such as Helen Stoner ultimately gain their independence to a certain extent and are able to marry the person they choose, they are eventually transferred from one patriarchal figure to the next (65). Based on these arguments most female characters in Conan Doyle’s stories, especially female victims and clients, exhibit a limited agency, as they are depicted as damsels in distress incapable of making their own decisions and unable to see through the manipulations and schemes of patriarchal figures. Scholars, such as Meghan Gordon, argue that Conan Doyle’s depiction of weak women is due to his preference of the patriarchal system. In fact, in her article “Women: Worldly, Wordy, or Un-Written; An Analysis of the Women of Sherlock Holmes and the Victorian era” Gordon argues that the representation of women in Doyle’s work had several functions, for instance “to further the ingenuity of deduction of Sherlock Holmes in placing him in juxtaposition to female characters who are typically eccentric, sensuous or silent” (1). Along these same lines, it is worth noting that by contrasting the great detective with passive silent women, it reinforces the idea that no woman matches Sherlock Holmes in intelligence, and thus, underlining his greatness. It would suggest that elevating Sherlock Holmes by depicting weak and silent women does not only highlight his positive qualities, but simultaneously underlines the women’s negative ones. Nonetheless, it can also be argued that Holmes’ elevation by means of highlighting opposite qualities in the other characters is not necessarily gender-specific. In several Sherlock Holmes stories such as “The Adventures of Charles Augustus Milverton” for instance negative qualities are pointed out in male characters as well. A further function of the weak portrayal of women in the Sherlock Holmes stories is, according to Gordon, to “provoke and
35 perpetuate the idea that a patriarchal society in England is preferred and prevalent” (1). It is undeniable that in the Sherlock Holmes stories the patriarchal system is, using Gordon’s words, “prevalent” (1); however, it may be an over-interpretation that Doyle’s depiction of weak women is an indicator for the author’s preference of the patriarchal system. Even though from a legal point of view women were in the position of handling their own finances, Conan Doyle portrays only patriarchal figures in control of money. Since the Married Women Property Act was passed in 1882, and “A Case of Identity” is set in 1888, Mary Sutherland theoretically could have been in charge of her finances (Danielová 45). Isokoski argues that “Mary Sutherland has a possibility to female independence in the financial terms; she has a substantial annual income from the interest fund that has been set to her, and in addition, she also earns rather well from her work as a typewriter” (Isokoski 60). Therefore, in theory, Mary Sutherland, Julia and Helen Stoner, and Alice would have had the possibility of increased agency. Conan Doyle’s conscious decision to give these female characters such minimal agency, although the groundwork for more active female characters had already been laid out, would align with Gordon’s theory that Doyle preferred the patriarchal system:
[i]n writing his female characters as feeble and victimized Doyle shows women as needing men to assist them in life, whether that man is one Sherlock Holmes to solve the case, or a husband – there is no truly independent woman in Doyle’s stories. And even in a case such as Helen Stoner’s wherein a woman has a very real possibility to become independent and powerful she is written as mostly silent and has no material assistance to provide in her case and renders herself needy … This portrayal renders the woman as incapable… of dealing with their personal affairs without the assistance of a man. This structure serves to preserve the English patriarchal platform for society, while also commenting on the fallibility of females (Gordon 3-4).
That said, it would be equally possible to suggest that that Conan Doyle did not depict these women as incapable of taking control over their finances due to their general inability to do so or because they were women. The rationale behind this is that the dependence on men’s decisions and power was deeply rooted in their upbringing and in the traditional gender hierarchy within the family unit, as they had
36 been told by their fathers what to do for most of their lives. Therefore, this portrayal of weak women indicates that, although the laws allowed women to be independent agents, the deep rooted mentality of the early to mid-Victorian period still had an enormous influence on the appropriate representation of female characters in fiction and real life. Thus, the enactment of the Married Woman Property Act was only the first step in regaining control and power of women, and that women had to adapt to the possibility of being in control again, which is arguably shown in the women’s inability to act. Conan Doyle’s criticism of the women’s passivity is here interpreted as a wake-up call for women to take action and seize the opportunity to be independent and have an increased agency. Further evidence of Doyle’s attempts at motivating women to take action is given in Aviram’s table below.
(table: Aviram 242)
This table shows that there are as many female victims as there are female perpetrators. This arguably implies a promotion for taking action on the women’s part. Although surely Conan Doyle did not want to convey the message that the only way to move from a passive to an active role is to become a criminal, but more so that women should not accept their imposed subordinate position without
37 questioning and without reacting against it. This idea is further emphasized by the fact that several women, according to Aviram, “belonged to more than one category” (242), meaning that these women reacted to their victimization by becoming a perpetrator. As already pointed out it was not Doyle’s aim to motivate women to become perpetrators, but to motivate them to take action, which is exemplified in characters such as Violet Hunter and Mary Morstan. These characters will be discussed in the chapter “Proactive Women and The Woman”.
3.4. Portrayal and Agency of Conan Doyle’s Villainesses
Many of the villainesses in the Sherlock Holmes stories display traits not in line with the Victorian codes and morals. In fact, Michelle Birkby describes these female villains as “ahead of their time” (2017). The reason for which they can be considered progressive is the fact that these women do not need to be rescued and they do not remain passive when they are being wronged; instead they seek revenge. As has already been mentioned, women in the Victorian period valued propriety, purity and reputation above all. They were characterized by a certain passivity within their domestic sphere, while it was usually men who took action. The extent to which the villainesses in the Conan Doyle stories differ from the ideal Victorian woman is exemplified in “The Adventure of the Veiled Lodger”, in which the female villain, Eugenia Ronder, murders her abusive husband with the help of her lover. According to Birkby, “at that point, she should commit suicide and usually the hero approves of this, as her atonement” (2017). However, Eugenia Ronder does live with the consequences of her action and does not choose the easy way out although her reputation was stained in Victorian terms - not only because she murdered her husband, but because she committed adultery as well. Several of these female offenders take justice into their own hands. In “The Greek Interpreter”, Sophy Kratides’ brother is murdered and afterwards she is kidnapped by the same men who killed her brother in order to obtain her property. These men are able to escape even Sherlock Holmes. However, Sophy Kratides is by no means a damsel in distress in need of being rescued. Not only does she manage to escape on her own, she takes matters into her own hands to seek
38 revenge as well. After a while Sherlock Holmes discovers that the two men have killed each other, but he knows exactly that it is Sophy Kratides who is behind the murders. A further notable female perpetrator who seeks revenge is Kitty Winter in “The Adventure of the Illustrious Client”. According to Birkby, Kitty Winter is “the staple of Victorian fiction – the wronged woman” (2017). She has been seduced by the Baron de Gruner, who then ruined her life. In fact, Cassandra Poole argues in her article “’The Woman’ and the Women in Sherlock Holmes”, that Kitty Winter does not want revenge because she is jealous that he has found another woman, but because - even though never explicitly mentioned in the text – scholars speculate that he had sold her and forced her into prostitution (20). Poole also claims that white slavery was a very common phenomenon in the 19th century all across Europe, and that for the Baron to take Kitty as his mistress, she must have belonged to a certain social class. If Kitty’s sole motive for revenge had been Gruner leaving her for another woman, she could have gone back to her former position in society (Poole 20). Since that was not the case, critics theorize that Kitty and the other women in the Baron’s little black book all had to experience the same fate (Poole 20). Conan Doyle is able to capture the essence of Kitty Winter in Watson’s description of her:
the shape of a slime, flame-like young woman with a pale, intense face, youthful and yet so worn with sin and sorrow that one read the terrible years which had left their leprous mark upon her ... There was an intensity of hatred in her white, set face and her blazing eyes such as women seldom and man never can attain (Conan Doyle 989-90).
This quote underlines how the Baron ruined her not only on a psychological level, but on a physical level as well. Watson recognizes this simply by looking at her and sees that this young woman has been through hell and wants to take revenge. Although she has suffered a lot Kitty Winter is not willing to accept the fate of wronged woman, as according to Birkby, “she is not the type to die quietly of shame. She sits on Holmes’ sofa, hating the villain of the story Baron de Gruner, more than any man could. Her intensity is white hot” (2017). Kitty discovers that the Baron is engaged to another woman and wants to warn her about the Baron’s cruelty. The woman, however, does not believe Kitty. Therefore, she asks Sherlock Holmes to
39 steal the Baron’s books in which he keeps record of all the women he has ruined. Sherlock Holmes not only fails to recover the books, but is attacked by the Baron as well. At that point, Kitty Winter throws acid in his face to avenge herself and all the other women the Baron has ruined. Birkby argues that “[w]hilst the men dithered and failed, Kitty Winter, the woman life flame acted” (2017). The fact that Kitty survives this situation and even managed to avenge herself and the other women the Baron has ruined shows her strength and resilience (Poole 20). Poole argues that “Miss Winter can be seen as something of the hero of the story, for it is through her actions that the villain is repaid for his crimes and prevented from ever committing them again” (20). Therefore, she disfigured the Baron’s face, not only to avenge herself and the other women, but to prevent the same thing happening to any other women in the future. It has already been briefly touched upon that various female villains became perpetrators after having being victimized. Example of former victims who have become offenders are of course Kitty Winter and Sophy Kratides. However, they are not the only ones. Lady Hilda Trelawney-Hope in “The Adventure of the Second Stain” undergoes a similar change. She develops from being a blackmail victim to being a thief and possibly an English traitor, as her blackmailer demands that she steals important political documents from her husband in exchange for his silence. Her motive is considerably different to Kitty Winter’s and Sophy Kratides’ as she does not become a criminal to avenge the injustice that had befallen her, but to protect her husband instead. It seems that Conan Doyle was been open-minded regarding gender roles and stereotypes, based on the portrayal of these female villains. That said, he was not as open-minded when it came to race. In fact, Gordon argues that a further function of the representation of female characters in the Sherlock Holmes stories is to “provoke and perpetuate the idea that a patriarchal society in England is preferred and prevalent” (1). Therefore, she argues that a common theme amongst the villainesses in the Sherlock Holmes adventures is that several of them either come from a different country or have lived abroad for a longer period of time, thus preserving the myth of pure and innocent English women. To exemplify her thesis, Gordon quotes “The Adventure of the Second Stain” to draw a comparison between the representation of the English Lady Hilda Trelawney Hope and the French woman Miss Fournaye. Lady Hope is portrayed as reserved and timid, whereas
40 Miss Fournaye is depicted as eccentric and quite useless, as she drops out of the plot rather quickly. Even though Lady Hope is the one who stole the documents, she is depicted in a more favourable light than the French woman (Gordon 2-3). According to Gordon, “[t]he direct contrast between these women of different and conflicting nationalities intentionally serves to portray the English woman, and the English as a whole, as the elite” (3). This portrayal of English superiority is exemplified in “The Noble Bachelor” as well. The American Hatty Doran is, according to Gordon, “manipulative, tomboyish, and self-sufficient” and “has a mind of her own” (3). Gordon implies that it would be unlikely that this type of woman would be accepted in England. Hatty Doran is contrasted with Flora Miller, Doran’s English maid, who is depicted as devoted to her employer, caring, and principled. Although both women perform questionable actions, Gordon argues that the English Flora Miller is “written by Doyle to gain the audience’s sympathy and forgiveness ... the English woman is again presented as more virtuous, righteous, and thus the elite of the duo” (3). Another important common denominator of these female villainesses, is that English women, apart from a few exceptions like Kitty Winter, never commit heinous crimes.
3.4. Proactive Women and The Woman
In the original Sherlock Holmes canon there are not only women with limited agency or female perpetrators, but women who play a neutral role and display a high degree of agency as well. One of these women is Mary Morstan in The Sign of Four. In her chapter “Mary Morstan: The Victim Who Refuses”, Michelle Birkby argues that Mary Morstan “ought to be a victim. She fits the template perfectly. She is a woman – the weaker sex. She is alone in the world. She is blonde, refined, though poor … Add to this the puzzling death of her father, the great treasure she is possibly heir to, and the mystery surrounding her” (2019 35). Birkby argues that because of these circumstances Mary Morstan is expected to run into the arms of a man, weep all the time, waiting for a man to rescue her from villains (2019 35). However, that is not the case with Mary Morstan; she wants to make her own decisions and choices. She therefore becomes proactive and hires a detective, because according to
41 Birkby, “[s]he wants guidance and advice, not be controlled. And she wants to be involved” (2019 36). Another smart, resourceful and independent woman is Violet Hunter in “The Adventure of the Copper Beeches”. Even Sherlock Holmes can appreciate her intelligence and decision-making (Poole 19). She meets Sherlock Holmes because she is not sure whether she should take a job or not, since her future employer as well as the circumstances of the employment seemed quite suspicious to her. Upon meeting her, Watson describes Violet Hunter as “plain but neatly dressed, with a bright, quick face, and the brisk manner of a woman who has had her own way to make it in the world” (Conan Doyle 318) adding that Sherlock Holmes was impressed with this lady (Conan Doyle 318), as it becomes clear that she is a very intelligent young woman. Violet Hunter has no family and friends, and had to take care of herself most of her life. According to Poole, Sherlock Holmes tends to perceive women as inferior and less intelligent (19); however, he asks for Violet’s help to free Alice saying: “[y]ou seem to me to have acted all through this matter like a very brave and sensible girl, Miss Hunter. Do you think that you could perform one more feat? I should not ask it of you if I did not think you a quite exceptional woman” (Conan Doyle 329). The fact that Sherlock Holmes consciously puts Violet Hunter into such a dangerous situation signifies his appreciation of her intellectual and practical skills. Irene Adler is known as The woman in the Sherlock Holmes canon, and she is the only woman to ever beat the great detective. Although she appears in only one short story, “A Scandal in Bohemia”, she is the most famous female character. She is the only woman in the canon to leave such a lasting impression on Sherlock Holmes, which is exemplified in Watson’s description of her:
[t]o Sherlock Holmes she is always the women. I have seldom heard him mention her under any other name. In his eyes, she eclipses and predominated the whole of her sex… There was but one woman to him, and that woman was the late Irene Adler, of dubious and questionable memory (Conan Doyle 161).
Irene Adler was born in New Jersey and had travelled around Europe as an actress and opera singer. When she was younger she had an affair with the Prince of Bohemia and kept a compromising photograph of them for insurance. The Prince,
42 now King, is engaged to be married and being blackmailed by Irene, threatening that she will show the photograph to his future wife. Thus, he hires Holmes to retrieve the compromising photograph. However, Irene sees through Sherlock’s disguised attempt to retrieve the photograph and follows him back home dressed as man. The fact that Irene tells Sherlock Holmes “good night” is arguably a provocation or challenge. It is not enough for her to best Sherlock Holmes, but she wants to make it even harder for herself. In this way, she arguably wanted to prove to herself that it was not just a lucky escape, but that she deserves to be remembered as the only woman to have ever beaten the great detective. Regarding Irene’s cross-dressing, Primorac argues that the “ability to shape-shift and cross gender barriers adds to her mystique… her transformations signal her agency and her control over her own body and identity: she acts on her behalf and in her own interest” (2013 96). This would suggest that Irene Adler, unlike other female characters in the Sherlock Holmes stories, is completely in control of her own fate. She does not answer to anyone but herself, as there is no authoritative male figure who makes decisions for her. A supportive explanation of this is her financial independence, as she has worked and earned money by being an actress and opera singer. Thus, she does not have to bend to anyone’s will but her own. A further factor, which highlights Irene Adler’s independence and freedom, is her unwillingness to conform to society’s rules and morals. She does not care about her reputation or what people think of her. She lives her life by her own rules and standards. However, she still recognizes that in some occasions it is more advantageous to be a man. In her letter to Sherlock she states that “[m]ale costume is nothing new to me. I often take advantage of the freedom which it gives” (Conan Doyle 174-175), which implies Irene’s frequent use of male costumes, not only as an actress, but off the stage as well. Irene, is not only a talented actress and an independent woman, but a smart individual as well. Her intelligence is shown by the fact that she was always a step ahead of Sherlock Holmes. When he goes to Irene’s house the following day, for example, he discovers that she has already disappeared. The only thing that was left of her was a cheeky letter addressed to Holmes. In this letter she also promises that she will not use the photograph for blackmailing anymore, but will keep it as an insurance. Upon reading these words, Sherlock is disappointed that he was not able to retrieve the photograph for the King, but the King is relieved because for him Irene
43 Adler’s word is enough as he states “I know that her word is inviolate. The photograph is now safe as if it were in the fire” (Conan Doyle 175). The fact that the King is more than happy with the outcome signifies his respect for Irene Adler as well - all he needed was her word. The King’s reaction demonstrates that even though Irene Adler is not a conventional Victorian woman, men respect her and do not question the integrity of her word. Furthermore, it shows that Irene Adler is an honourable woman, who would never break a promise. As has already been pointed out, no other woman made such a lasting impression on Sherlock Holmes. In fact, when the King asks him what he would like as a payment for his service, Holmes answers that he would like to keep the photograph of Irene. Further evidence of his admiration for Irene Adler is given in the following passage: “[h]e used to make merry over the cleverness of women, but I have not heard him do it of late. And when he speaks of Irene Adler, or when he refers to her photograph, it is always under the honourable title of the woman” (Conan Doyle 175). This quote demonstrates that being beaten by a woman made Holmes rethink his view on women’s intelligence and skills. While he was sure that women were intellectually inferior previous to the encounter with Irene, he now no longer has this certainty. Adler’s abilities to deceive and beat Sherlock Holmes, as well as her honour, resolution, beauty, independence and unconventionality are arguably contributing factors to her being the most famous woman in the Sherlock Holmes canon. In fact, Poole argues that
Irene is strong, competent, and intelligent; she does not allow herself to be oppressed, and she does not allow herself to be bested. In a literary universe full of victimized women, oppressed and manipulated by the men in their lives, Irene herself is the manipulator. She outwits one of the greatest detectives in literary history. She ignores all the gender roles and expectations of her time, turning conventionality on its head” (Poole 23).
One of the most important features of Irene’s characters is her refusal to accept gender roles, which is brilliantly highlighted by the King’s depiction of her. He frequently uses contrasts to describe Adler as is exemplified in such statements as “[s]he has the face of the most beautiful of women, and the mind
44 of the most resolute of men” (Conan Doyle 166). From this quote it becomes clear that Irene Adler embodies features both typically female and traditionally male. Irene’s ability to combine men’s and women’s positive qualities make her a proto-feminist, as she does not let herself be defined by traditional gender roles and by what society expects from her.
45 4. Re-Interpreting Sherlock Holmes from a Female Perspective in Birkby’s The House at Baker Street: Behind Every Great Detective Stands a Great Woman…
4.1. Re-centering Female Characters – Moving Women to the Foreground
Feminist detective fiction has become a world-wide phenomenon. In her chapter “Feminist Detective Fiction”, Maggie Humm argues that earlier detective novels “express attitudes towards individualism, relationships, geography, time and language in such a way that complex sexual and social anxieties are denied in favour of gender stereotypes“ (237). However, following the path that female crime writers such as Sara Paretsky had laid out, authors of female detective fiction have been addressing feminist issues in their novels in recent years. Furthermore, female protagonists are no longer stereotyped, but are transformed into well-rounded complex characters instead. Birkby’s novel certainly follows this trend. By placing Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson in the foreground it brings about several changes to the established stories of the Sherlock Holmes canon, e.g. the setting, the agency of several female characters, the approach to the victims, and the depiction of female empowerment through the concept of sisterhood.
4.1.1. Narration from a Female Perspective
In the novel The House at Baker Street the author Michelle Birkby gave the narrator voice to an already known secondary character of the Sherlock Holmes canon. Instead of going with the typical male investigating duo, Birkby chose Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson as the main protagonists. Sherlock Holmes has his partner in crime, Dr Watson, and Birkby gave Mrs Hudson her Watson too, Mary Watson. The House at Baker Street can be considered a revisionist historical novel. In his book Von historischer Fiktion zu historiographischer Metafiktion: 1: Theorie, Typologie und Poetik des historischen Romans, Ansgar Nünning defines the revisionist historical novel. According to Nünning, the aim of revisionist historical
46 novels is to challenge and question accepted mind-sets by telling so-called “Gegengeschichten” (269) by re-writing a story about women questioning the established definition of gender roles (A. Nünning 269). Determining features include a non-linear chronology, commentary, intertextual references and the significance of space (A. Nünning 275). Another essential element of the revisionist historical novel is the narrator (A. Nünning 271). In fact, the narrating voice is usually given to oppressed or marginalized characters, in order to directly question the established values of a specific time period through the narrator (A. Nünning 271). Nünning’s defining characteristics of the revisionist historical novel are certainly present in The House at Baker Street. First of all, the narrator is indeed a woman. Mrs Hudson questions and comments on Victorian standards, especially those referring to propriety and reputation, revealing how destructive these standards can be. Secondly, she refers several times to cases Sherlock Holmes has solved in Conan Doyle’s stories. Thirdly, she frequently uses flashbacks, thus disrupting the linear chronological order of events. Lastly, the setting assumes a new meaning in The House at Baker Street, in which Mrs Hudson’s kitchen is depicted as the heart of 221b Baker Street, and not Sherlock Holmes’ rooms. Furthermore, as will be shown, the world outside 221b Baker Street symbolizes Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s development. Similarly to Jean Rhys in Wide Sargasso Sea, and Coetzee in Foe, Birkby wants to give authority to characters who were defined by the voice of others. For instance, all the information the readership receives about Bertha’s character is given by what Sir Edward Fairfax Rochester tells Jane. Thus, Bertha’s characterization is determined by her husband, and the readership never discovers anything more about her. Therefore, Jean Rhys felt inspired to fill this gap. In fact, Hilary Jenkins, editor of the 2001 Penguin Books version of Wide Sargasso Sea, writes in her introduction that Rhys’ novel “Wide Sargasso Sea sets out to answer the question of why Bertha Mason / Antoinette Cosway has gone mad in the first place” (vii). Jenkins highlights that Rochester’s characterization of Bertha only applies to one aspect of her character, by stating that “Wide Sargasso Sea is therefore a rewriting of the classic text from the point of view of the most marginalized character in Brontë’s novel: Bertha Mason is not only mad and female, the imprisoned, rejected wife, but also she comes from Jamaica, one of Britain’s colonies” (vii). Hence, her origin and her mental state only make certain layers of
47 her character visible. Therefore, Rhys is successful in “giving voice to the marginalized and silenced (the mad woman, the colonized)” (Jenkins xii). Rhys’ intention was to disclose and unveil Jane Eyre’s racist and sexist assumptions, as well as to embed Brontë’s novel in a broader context. In addition, Wide Sargasso Sea demonstrates how Bertha’s madness was a consequence of colonialism and the patriarchal system (Jenkins xii). Mrs Hudson’s depiction in Conan Doyle’s stories is as one-dimensional and unilateral as Bertha Mason’s in Jane Eyre. In fact, Michelle Birkby suggests that people tend to think of Mrs Hudson only as Mr Holmes’ housekeeper (2016 viii), due to Dr Watson’s characterization of Mrs Hudson – the only one in the canon. The readership of the Sherlock Holmes stories perceives Mrs Hudson in a certain way because Dr Watson depicts her this way. There are no further perspectives that shed light on Mrs Hudson’s character. Therefore, Mrs Hudson’s characterization is exclusively filtered through the lens of a man, which arguably differs considerably from that of a woman’s; a man’s lens prioritizes or perceives, for instance, the person’s surroundings or the interaction with others differently. Revisionist novels like Foe, Wide Sargasso Sea and, The House at Baker Street present these common assumptions about canonical characters as being multi-facetted, bringing to the surface qualities of these characters that have been ignored in the respective original versions. This revisionism occurs as they are characterized holistically through the eyes of a different narrator. Based on Vera Nünning’s typology and definition of detective fiction, Birkby’s novel can be said to be strongly influenced by Golden Age detective fiction. Nünning argues that Golden Age detective novels have a strong ludical, puzzle-like component which determines the plot development as the detective follows clue after clue to finally solve the case (9). Birkby’s novel mirrors this concept as Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson follow the clues by means of polite conversations and interpretation of evidence, putting all the missing pieces together. Interrogating suspects or witnesses through polite conversations is another key feature Nünning mentions, as well as the presence of an investigating duo instead of a lone wolf, and a main cast mainly formed by upper-middle class characters (V. Nünning 5-7). Furthermore, the motivations and reasons behind the committed crimes as well as the inner workings of the murderer play a vital part, which is thoroughly depicted in Birkby’s novel. Yet there is a notable absence of other key characteristics such as
48 the lack of a closed setting, and, most interestingly, the grand finale in which the detective exposes the murderer in front of an audience, mainly composed of other suspects, witnesses, and occasionally police men, showing off his or her intellectual skills (V. Nünning 6-7). It could be argued there is a grand finale in Birkby’s novel, though it differs from the traditional ones as Mrs Hudson neither has all the answers when she confronts the murderer, nor solid evidence or an audience. The House at Baker Street displays characteristics of the Hard-Boiled Detective Fiction as well, since the focus of the novel is not only on the plot but on the characters as well, depicting their development and focusing on their thoughts and feelings. Although Mary Watson and Mrs Hudson do not resemble the traditional hard-boiled loner who is isolated by society, lacks interpersonal relationships and uses violence, they do find themselves constantly in dangerous situations, which characterize most of the hard-boiled novels (V. Nünning 7-8). Birkby does not exclusively focus on upper-middle class characters. Instead they range from rich aristocrats to working class people who barely make a living, as for instance the people of Whitechapel and the Baker Street Irregulars. On a formal level, it coincides more with the hard-boiled tradition, as the narrator herself is the detective (V. Nünning 8). The setting would also indicate an influence of the American tradition, as it does not occur on a cruise on the Nile, in a country mansion, or on the Orient Express, but rather in a dangerous urban setting instead (V. Nünning 9). Therefore, Birkby arguably did not exclusively stick to one detective fiction tradition but picked and chose elements from both to reunite them in her novel, and in this sense gives her novel and her characters a nuanced context. Birkby mixes elements of both the Golden Age Detective Fiction and the Hard-Boiled tradition. However, the narrative style chosen by Birkby follows the formula of the hard-boiled tradition (V. Nünning 8), lending her voice to Mrs Hudson and not to Mary Watson as the formula of Golden Age Detective fiction would suggest. Narrating the story from a female perspective instead of the typically male one associated with the Sherlock Holmes stories, conveyed several changes to the plot and the characters. The reader gains insight into Mrs Hudson’s mind and life, revealing that she is not merely Sherlock Holmes’ housekeeper. Seeing through Mrs Hudson’s eyes allows the reader to understand more aspects of Sherlock Holmes, as Mrs Hudson frequently perceives him in a different way than Dr Watson. Moreover, since Dr Watson is not the narrator of the novel, he is also characterized
49 from a different angle – an outside perspective. While Dr Watson’s narration is focused heavily on the investigation, Mrs Hudson devotes her attention to the dynamics and relationships between the characters in addition to the investigation. Her interpretation of Sherlock Holmes and Irene Adler’s relationship, Mr Holmes’ appreciation of Dr Watson, and Sherlock Holmes’ treatment and perception of women through a woman’s eyes are all examples of this. Most importantly, though, the friendship between Mary Watson and Mrs Hudson is thoroughly explored. Mrs Hudson recounts their first encounter and how the men upstairs indirectly brought them closer together. Through their behaviour it becomes clear to the women both lacked excitement in their lives and that they were not happy to hear only parts of the men’s stories - they wanted to live their own story. Mrs Hudson often addresses the reader directly, which creates a bond between herself and her readership. Birkby uses this narrative technique to include the reader in Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s adventure, making the readership part of the investigation, as she explains her and Mary’s plans and how they came to certain conclusions. In addition, Birkby uses this technique to share Mrs Hudson’s fears and doubts with her readership as can already be seen in the prologue, when Mrs Hudson admits to the reader that she is afraid to face the blackmailer and that it may have been smarter to tell Mr Holmes about their case, worrying that they will not make it out alive. In Conan Doyle’s stories on the other hand, fear is an emotion that his protagonist does not feel, or at least never openly admits to it. One reason for this could be that Sherlock Holmes himself is not the narrator. However, generally showing fear is not in line with the concept of the male hero. Furthermore, as has already been pointed out in the previous chapter, Sherlock Holmes values rationality above all and therefore dissects every feeling and emotion in order to make sense of it. Having a limited emotional range is arguably a consequence of rationalizing feelings. Thus, in Sherlock Holmes’ eyes, fear is only a sum of different physical symptoms, e.g. an elevated pulse. Consequently, Mrs Hudson admitting to experiencing fear is not necessarily correlated to a gender discourse, meaning that she is not ashamed to admit that she is afraid because she is a woman, but simply because she, in contrast to Sherlock Holmes, values not only rationality but emotions as well, and therefore is able to experience them in a higher degree than the great detective. Thus, Mrs Hudson’s strengthens the bond with her readers as she opens up, and in this way she makes herself vulnerable and exposed to
50 judgement, letting her readership glimpse in into her deepest emotions. Birkby also frequently uses the direct reader address technique when she doubts herself, lacking the confidence to move forward, as if hoping for a motivational speech from her readership. By telling her readers about her worries, she reminds herself of the reasons why she is investigating and thus, convincing herself that even though she is not Sherlock Holmes, detective extraordinaire, she will be able to help these victimized women. Furthermore, it can be argued that this device is also used to justify Mrs Hudson’s behaviour. This can be seen in the excerpt when she talks about the vent and how she uses it to eavesdrop
It was wrong. It was eavesdropping. It was dishonest. It was against all the rules of being a good housekeeper. I profess myself completely shocked at my own lack of discretion and privacy. I told myself so every time I opened the vent (However, if you are completely honest, if you had the opportunity to open a vent and listen to Sherlock Holmes talk, would you not do so? Of course you would, and that is why you read these stories (Birkby 2016 16-17)
Mrs Hudson knows that a housekeeper should be discrete and not eavesdrop on her tenants’ conversations, yet she justifies her behaviour by addressing the readers’ own curiosity, stating that if given the chance, her readers would act as she does. This way she creates a sense of community between herself and her readership. Mrs Hudson also addresses the reader directly when she thinks that her readership would disapprove of her behaviour, not only for lack of discretion, but when she is facing dangerous situations. She explains that Mr Holmes turned away from these victims, and hence, she deserves to fight for them, highlighting frequently that this is “our case” (Birkby 2016 40) and not Sherlock and Watson’s. Although it is not explicitly stated whether the reader is included in the “our” or if Mrs Hudson is only referring to herself and Mary Watson, based on her recurrent direct address to the readership and the bond that has been created between herself and her audience, she arguably intends to include the readers as well, and thus strengthening the bond even more. Mrs Hudson’s narrative style displays an equal relationship between her and her co-detective Mary Watson. In Conan Doyle’s stories by contrast, it is already implied by Dr Watson’s narration that he and Sherlock Holmes have an unequal
51 relationship, placing Mr Holmes on top. This relationship is exemplified by Dr Watson’s feeling of awe towards Mr Holmes, as well as the fact that he, and by extension the reader, has no insight into the detective’s inner workings. This helps to elevate the detective, ascribing him almost superhuman qualities. These types of narrative techniques are, according to Vera Nünning, one of the characteristic features of Golden Age detective fiction, many of which are exemplified in the Sherlock Holmes stories, both on a narrative as well as on a content level. In Birkby’s novel, however, the relationship between the two main characters is an equal one, though on a first glance it could appear that Mrs Hudson is the main contributor to the investigation with the occasional help of Mary Watson. Yet this is due to Mrs Hudson being the narrator of the story. It can be argued that Birkby attempted to display this equality not only through Mrs Hudson’s frequent appreciation of Mary’s cleverness and intellect but also by making Mary the first female character of the novel to make deductions based on her analysis of Laura Shirley’s letter. Furthermore, when either of these main characters makes a deduction or interprets evidence in a certain way, they always explain how they came to the conclusion to the other characters. Consequently, by delineating their train of thought not only to the other characters but to the reader as well, they underline this existing bond between the protagonists and the readership. Mrs Hudson frequently uses flashbacks to inform the readership about the backstories as well as about the different character traits of other personae in the novel, thus giving the reader insight into how the characters were in the past and how the bonds between them were created. Mrs Hudson’s flashback are particularly interesting, especially the ones that explore Mary’s and Mrs Hudson’s friendship. Conan Doyle never mentions how these two women became friends, whereby Birkby depicts how they met each other and how both women immediately noticed that there is a special bond between them. Mary came to 221b Baker Street as a client of Sherlock and after Holmes solved her case, she told Mrs Hudson everything about it, as Mary recognized that it must be frustrating to only hear bits and pieces and never the whole story (Birkby 2016 217-218). The function of these flashbacks of Mary’s and Mrs Hudson’s friendship help to underline the importance of their friendship, demonstrating that since the beginning they had a special bond. Consequently, this friendship is beneficial to both women, as it is a source of mutual respect and support. The two protagonists are able to gain strength and confidence
52 from one another because of their empowering friendship, and recognize that when they are together nothing can stop them. Furthermore, it is also interesting to see how Birkby dismisses female competition, as Mrs Hudson states that “I had wanted to dislike Mary for changing our perfect little household. Instead, she became my greatest friend and bound the four of us even tighter together. She changed all our lives, quite unwittingly. Mary Morstan – Watson these days – was now part of the family of 221b” (Birkby 2016 57) This statement could be interpreted as a criticism to the common assumption that women are always in competition with one another and thus, hate other women. Mrs Hudson’s flashbacks provide backstories on a variety of characters and add an additional layer to the characterization of various characters present in both versions, Birkby’s and Conan Doyle’s. For instance, when reading Conan Doyle’s stories, the readership sees the characters through Watson’s eyes only. Birkby’s revision adds qualities, both positive and negative, to these pre-existing characterizations. The revision of the main characters frequently occurs in these flashbacks. The female perspective is also apparent in the way in which the setting changes. While Dr Watson describes Mr Holmes’ rooms and never mentions the rest of the house, Mrs Hudson gives the reader a description of the hallway, her bedroom, and most importantly her kitchen. The kitchen is Mrs Hudson’s domain, and she tells the reader exactly how it looks, what type of floor is in it, and that she chose these particular tiles because they are easy to clean; she goes on to describe the background of her big wooden table, where all her pans are, how proud she is of her stove, and so on. By doing this, she is able to transmit her love for her kitchen to the reader, which can be seen in the following quote:
The kitchen is my domain, my office, my refuge. Let me tell you all about it. This place is important. This place is my home. If you open the black-painted door of 221b Baker Street, you find yourself in a dark, paralleled entrance hall. … Facing you, on the left, are carpeted stairs up to the rest of the house. On the right is a short hallway, leading down four steps to my kitchen. … Beside the back door was my pride and joy, a large gas cooking range, which kept the kitchen hot even on the coldest days. There was a chair in front of this, comfy and worn, with a rag rug rolled up in the corner to be laid out in the evenings… In the centre of the room was a huge oak table, scrubbed white with use, covered in scars and burns. This kitchen was my home, and I spent
53 the happiest times of my life there. So now, can you see it, my kitchen? The place where I belong, and where I felt like I belonged. This is where it all began. John’s stories begin upstairs, and mine downstairs (Birkby 2016 13-14)
In this quote it becomes clear to the reader that the kitchen is the place where Mrs Hudson spends most of her time, and every chair or table has a story and holds meaning to her. The kitchen is not only her room, but it is also her safe place and her happy place. The position of the kitchen is important as well - when Holmes’ clients enter the front door, they take the stairs right in front of them, thus, overlooking the little hallway on the right which leads into Mrs Hudson’s kitchen. The fact that the kitchen is in the corner of the main hallway plays upon Mrs Hudson’s traditional position in the background. The position of the kitchen could also imply the division of public and private sphere. As already pointed out, men usually occupied the public sphere, whereas women were confined to the domestic one. While crimes were solved, decisions were made and the men talked about business and politics in Holmes’ rooms upstairs, the activities performed in Mrs Hudson’s kitchen were limited to domestic tasks such as cooking, baking and washing the dishes. This division between the public and the private is also echoed in the binary upstairs-downstairs; upstairs representing Mr Holmes and Dr Watson, while downstairs stands for Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson. Considering Maureen T. Reddy’s typology of female detectives, Birkby’s Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson incorporate elements of the amateur sleuth, the hard- boiled female investigator and the lesbian detective. The strongest influence comes from the amateur sleuths, since several parallels can be drawn between Mrs Hudson and Miss Marple. Like Agatha Christie, Birkby uses female stereotypes to her advantage, such as when Mrs Hudson starts asking questions and no one suspects that she is investigating, as most people interpret her behaviour typical for a nosy, gossipy, elderly lady (Reddy 1988 19). While Miss Marple gathers most of her information through her gardener who knows all the secrets of the village’s inhabitants, Mrs Hudson leans on gossip columns in magazines and Langdale Pike who, similarly to Miss Marple’s gardener, knows all the gossip of London’s elite. Neither of these women are considered to be a threat as they hide their intelligence, allowing them to gather the information they need. According to Reddy, this is a typically feminine strategy (Reddy 1988 20). Miss Marple’s questioning of people
54 goes unsuspected because of her assumed nosiness, and thus, people do not feel threatened by her (Reddy 1988 19). Mrs Hudson’s questioning on the other hand goes unnoticed as well, yet there are several differences to Miss Marple’s ways. Firstly, Mrs Hudson explains straight away that she is investigating a blackmailing case, implying that it is not mere nosiness. Secondly, Mrs Hudson is not perceived as a threat to the blackmailer, not because she is a gossipy elderly lady, but simply because she is a woman. Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson also display traits of the hard-boiled female detective, as the women face dangerous situations throughout the novel (V. Nünning 9). Like several of their hard-boiled predecessors, neither Mrs Hudson nor Mary Watson have any immediate family left (Reddy 1988 105). Furthermore, it is common among hard-boiled detectives to function as the narrator as well (V. Nünning 8), which is the case in The House at Baker Street. Additionally, Mrs Hudson frequently reports about food and clothes - another trait characteristic of this sub-genre (Reddy 1988 95). Although neither Mrs Hudson nor Mary Watson are lesbians, there are arguably visible parallels between the lesbian detective fiction and Birkby’s novel, in that the main focus is on characters’ personal growth and the process of coming. While lesbian detectives’ coming out refers to openly living their lives according to their sexual preferences (Reddy 1988 123), Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson’s coming out is characterized by the exposure of who they truly are, i.e. not merely a housekeeper or a wife but two extraordinary women who are capable of growing, learning, and solving the most difficult of puzzles. Another focal point of both lesbian detective fiction and to some extent in the hard- boiled tradition is the importance of community as a means to mutual support (Reddy 1988 129). This aspect is best exemplified in Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s empowering friendship.
4.1.2. Female Characters’ Development
Having always been in the background, Mrs Hudson perceives herself to be just that, a background character. This is conveyed throughout the novel with the use of specific statements such as “[m]y place is in the shadows, off the page, silent behind the clever and the good. I am the watcher, the listener, the minor player in the game. To be here, now, in this situation, in danger, is not my role” (Birkby 2016 3). She has
55 always been overshadowed by Mr Holmes and Dr Watson and has accustomed herself to her assigned role of being Mr Holmes’ housekeeper. Her duties are very limited, e.g. answering the door, showing Holmes’ clients upstairs to his rooms, and making tea. When the blackmailer asks her who she is, she does not only tell him her name, but she adds that she is Mr Holmes’ housekeeper, as if being Mr Holmes’ housekeeper was her defining quality. The vent plays an important role in this novel, representing for once Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s position in the shadows, as their action is limited to listening to Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson think and come up with plans to act on. Her perceiving herself as a background character is also conveyed in the way she behaves and dresses. Mrs Hudson is more conservative than for instance Mary Watson. Thus she attempts to behave like a respectable lady in Victorian England, always quiet, polite, discreet, and reserved. She never acts out or draws attention to herself, knowing her role, and thus seldom overstepping such boundaries. Yet it is important to note that this behaviour is not representative of her nature. It seems as though she struggles internally whether to live her true self or to conform to society. Her way of dressing likewise implies that she keeps herself in the background, not wearing flashy or flamboyant clothing but plain and sombre dresses instead.
Sometimes I felt I was invisible, just one more number in the huge mass of London’s respectable older women, always in black, always doing the right thing, always silent. I glanced towards the wardrobe. In there were two dresses I had bought on an impulse. One was dark green, the colour of horse chestnut leaves in shadow. The other, even more daringly, was a deep russet red. … Hector loved me in green. He said it made my eyes bewitching. But I was an almost-silver-haired widow now, nothing but a landlady, and we weren’t supposed to wear green dresses and have bewitching eyes. As for red – that was beyond the pale! (Birkby 2016 29)
This quote displays Mrs Hudson’s conscious attempt to conform to society’s expectation of women, especially when she explains how respectable ladies should behave and dress. This strictness is also exemplified in her hairstyle, which, as she tells the reader, is always neatly tied back into a tight bun, not one hair out of place. Yet the fact that she bought impulsively the red and the green dress, as well as her
56 having bewitching eyes imply that she struggles to conform to these set expectations. Conforming goes to a certain extent against her nature. Consequently, her internal struggle to balance her personality and society’s expectations could be read as Birkby’s criticism of the Victorian conformist culture, in which women almost exclusively aspired to be domestic goddesses and did not want to attract attention due to attire or behaviour that expresses individuality, such as wearing a “deep russet red” (Birkby 2016 29) dress. Mary Watson’s appearance reflects her non-conforming nature. While Mrs Hudson’s attempts to conform to society’s expectation, Mary Watson is not afraid to show her true nature through her appearance: her hair is not done up in a neat and tight bun like Mrs Hudson’s but is loosely tied back with several strands of hair hanging out. She does not seek attention with her attire but she does not try to blend in with the masses of London either. Her dresses are not sombre and black, but light-coloured or embroidered with flowers signifying her optimism and confidence. From Mrs Hudson’s first description of Mary Watson it is clear that she has some characteristic features of the New Woman emerging in the late 19th century, refusing to adhere to strict morals and virtues, which is not only underlined by her hair and her clothing but by the way she carries herself, putting her shoulders back like a soldier and facing situations head on and, most importantly, not hiding her emotions.
The personification of beauty of the time was a full-figured brunette, with dimples, but Mary didn’t fit the fashion at all. She was slender, and tall, almost as tall as John. She had a firm chin, and a straight nose, and an intense blue gaze. She had masses of curly golden hair that firmly refused to stay in place, always falling out of its pins. She preferred … to dress in simple blouses and skirts, with barely a bustle, and usually wore a simple straw hat, often pushed impatiently to the back of her head. She had a mobile face that expressed every emotion she felt and every thought she had. She laughed easily, and she was clever. (Birkby 2016 14-15)
This quote indicates that Mary Watson does not fit in with all the English ladies. In fact, she is the anti-thesis of what a woman in Victorian England should look like as her hair is blond and not brunette and her features are not soft and feminine, but sharp and defined. The fact that her hair refuses to stay in place could convey Mary Watson’s refusal to conform to the strict morals of society. Her straw hat carries a
57 similar meaning, as it is “often pushed impatiently to the back of her head” (Birkby 2016 15), highlighting that Mary Watson does not even bother to look the part. Moreover, she is not silent and subdued but one can read her emotions and thoughts from her facial expression. Furthermore, when describing Mary Watson, Mrs Hudson tells the reader that Mary is “tall, almost as tall as John” (Birkby 2016 14). The height is a symbol that expresses the equality in their relationship, as they are, based on their height, practically on the same level. Although Mrs Hudson likes her life as a housekeeper and Mary thoroughly enjoys her marriage to John Watson, they do not feel challenged enough. Mrs Hudson is ashamed when Mary first discovers the she is listening in to the men’s conversations upstairs because Mary is such a lively and happy person and Mrs Hudson probably assumed that her life must be thrilling. Yet Mrs Hudson soon comes to realize that Mary Watson too is bored and that the only excitement she gets is from her husband’s tales (Birkby 2016 178-179). Thus, Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson share a similar aspect: both seem to be happy with their lives but they are not, they are bored and longing for adventure. In fact, whenever Mrs Hudson sees Mr Holmes and Dr Watson storm out of the door to chase criminals around London, she secretly wanted to join them.
When I watched them charge off hot on the chase, I wished I could go too. I swallowed that feeling. It was not my place to hunt down the villains or track the clues or save he victim. It was my place to wait at home, and look after my tenants when they returned. I was where I was meant to be (Birkby 2016 27).
It is clear that she is longing for excitement. The use of the vent is not only a symbol of their role in the background, as already mentioned, but also an indicator of their boredom, lack of excitement in their lives and the longing for adventures. Since nothing thrilling ever happens in their lives, they passively take part in the men’s adventures by eavesdropping on their conversations about their cases. Dr Watson knows his wife’s worth and when Sherlock points out to him that his wife is up to something, he replies that he would not be surprised if she took on a more challenging hobby than baking or knitting (Birkby 2016 58-59). The binary background-foreground is mirrored by the binary listening-taking action. Thus, when Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson take on the case, they are forced
58 out of their traditional roles and must adapt to a new situation. Mrs Hudson describes this process as taking a “step forward into the light” (Birkby 2016 4). As they have no experience in investigating, they first lean strongly on what they have learnt from Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson while listening to their conversations through the vent. Furthermore, Mary Watson has acquired medical knowledge by typing the reports of Dr Watson’s clients, which comes in handy when she analyses Adam Ballant’s corpse. Thanks to her acquired medical knowledge Mary is able to determine Adam Ballant’s cause of death, stating that due to the specific strangle marks on his neck he could not have committed suicide, and therefore must have been murdered. This scene shows that the women apply what they have learned to real situations, putting theory into practice and showing that they are no longer simply listeners, but agents. Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson undergo considerable changes, developing from passive to active characters. Their development comprises the acquirement of new skills and a new gained confidence, which leads to an increased agency on Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s part. Instead of drinking tea, eavesdropping, and gossiping, they make deductions, interpret evidence, come up with theories, and follow the clues – basically, they think and take action. Birkby implies that their minds had not been challenged for a long time, stating that “[i]t felt odd, it almost felt like my [Mrs Hudson’s] brain was rusty, and needed to be coaxed back into life” (Birkby 2016 31). Yet they finally felt alive, using their brains and spending their time doing something meaningful. It was they who now were investigating, not Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson, Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson had their own case and although they were at first afraid that they would not be able to solve it, they accepted it anyway and took on new responsibilities. Mrs Hudson’s development is echoed in the setting. The first stage occurred extratextually after the deaths of her husband and her son, when she decided to move to London to look after her late husband’s properties. The setting changes as she leaves the country to move to the city. Already back then she had to adapt to a new situation, moving from the role of the lady of the house to the role of a business woman, thus displaying an increased agency. It was also during this period that Mrs Hudson develops her distinctive knowledge of human nature, as she had to hire maids and servants, find the right tenants and negotiate with tradesmen. Although at first she did not have any experience in this business, she learnt how to balance
59 books and run a business. Being a successful businesswoman, Mrs Hudson was ahead of her time. In fact, she argues that “[w]hilst Parliament argued over whether women had the mental ability to even own their own clothes, I quietly administered an empire – and no one noticed (Birkby 2016 7), showing that women in her time still had limited rights regarding property and that they were considered intellectually inferior to men. The fact that Mrs Hudson was building an empire without having any prior knowledge or skills required in this business, shows her skills of adaptation and quick learning. Mrs Hudson is aware of the fact that she has changed which becomes clear when she states: “[w]ith all these discoveries about myself I changed and grew and become not Martha Hudson, grieving widow, but Mrs Hudson, formidable housekeeper and successful landlady” (Birkby 2016 8). The use of successful landlady is worth pointing out, as in Conan Doyle’ stories it is only briefly mentioned that Mrs Hudson is the landlady and mostly she tends to be depicted as a housekeeper. In contrast Birkby emphasizes several times that Mrs Hudson is the landlady and it is she who owns 221b Baker Street. Mrs Hudson’s development then comes to a halt. In fact, she takes a step back, confining herself to the quiet life of a landlady and housekeeper and setting- wise to her kitchen. She sold all her properties apart from 221b Baker Street and enjoyed her time baking and cooking in her kitchen. Michelle Birkby devotes almost three pages of her novel to the description of Mrs Hudson’s kitchen, which foregrounds its importance, not only to Mrs Hudson, but the novel itself. The kitchen is also the place that allows her to live her adventures through Mr Holmes and Dr Watson, as the vent connects the kitchen to Mr Holmes’ rooms. It is also important to note that Mary Watson is the only person to be allowed in the kitchen when Mrs Hudson is not present, suggesting a strong bond between the two women. Most of Mrs Hudson’s life revolves around her kitchen. She spends most of her time there performing domestic activities, which implies her passivity in the public sphere and her compliance with traditional gender roles. Although the kitchen mirrors Mrs Hudson’s position in the background, it also represents the starting point of her new adventure and the next step of Mrs Hudson’s development. Holmes sends Laura Shirley away, yet, instead of staying in their passive role as they normally would, Mrs Hudson and Mary decide to take action and offer Mrs Shirley a cup of tea in the kitchen to comfort the weeping woman. This is the turning point in Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s adventure, as they decide
60 to help her by taking on her case. However, it seems that Mrs Hudson is not ready to leave her kitchen just yet, as the initial stages of their investigation exclusively take place there. The information they are able to gather within the four walls is not enough but instead of leaving the house themselves they limit their action to delegate this task to the Baker Street Irregulars. While earlier female detectives like V.I. Warshawski eschewed feminine traits, Mrs Hudson aspires a balance between her role as a woman in the Victorian period and her desire for adventure. Therefore, Mrs Hudson is neither abandoning her domestic life, nor renouncing the upcoming adventure. A further step in Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s development occurs when they go to Whitechapel, leaving the confined space represented by Mrs Hudson’s kitchen. They actively follow clues based on information they received from Billy and Wiggins. After the consultation with the Whitechapel Lady, they realize that the case might be bigger than they initially thought. Consequently, they doubt whether they have the skills and the mind to rise to the occasion. Yet they are dedicated to living up to their clients’ expectations and continue to work on the case, which leads them to leave the house time and time again. The driving force behind their actions is not only the devotion to their clients but they mostly act out of compassion, empathy, and a sense of sisterhood since they are able to understand what it means to be a woman and what consequences a stained reputation could have in strict Victorian England. Sherlock Holmes lacks exactly these qualities and that is the reason why he sends away weeping women like Laura Shirley. Since he is not able to put himself in their shoes, like Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson are, he considers their problems to be trivial and petty, failing to understand that Laura Shirley was afraid that he would talk to her husband. With every visit outside the walls of 221b Baker Street the women gain confidence and literally step out of their comfort zone more and more. A scene that exemplifies Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s development is the entering of Sir George Burnwell’s house. Instead of talking politely to their suspects, they decide to take action and get the proof they need at any costs, even if it means breaking into the suspect’s house. This key scene also includes a vital aspect, as it is the first time that the investigating women expose themselves to a life-threatening situation. The women are puzzled when they first enter Sir George Burnwell’s study. They feel like they have been led there and that something is not right: the backdoor to the
61 house is not bolted, the door to his study is unlocked, and the presence of a massive impenetrable safe. Mary’s intelligence and cleverness are essential in the study scene because she is the one who realizes that what they are looking for will not be in the safe (Birkby 2016 149-150):
“An easily opened back door … An unlocked study door – and then and impregnable safe? That doesn’t make any sense” … “it feels like we were led here,” Mary continued… “Leading us here, and then sending us away.” “Mary, can you explain?” Irene demanded. Mary turned round to face us … “Do you know what I would do if I had something very precious to keep safe? … ” she asked. “I’d buy the biggest safe I could find. I’d put it where everyone can see it. I’d make it easy to get to. And then… I’d make it impossible to crack. I’d make it the kind of safe that someone would spend hours trying to get into, and then fail, or just give up and walk away ... “… Mary’s deduction was worthy of Sherlock Holmes himself “Mary, you are a devious woman and I hope John Watson appreciates that,” Irene said, laughing. (Birkby 2016 149-150)
This quote not only shows how smart and devious Mary is but her ability to put herself in someone else’s shoes as well which, as already noted, is a vital aspect of their investigation. Another important aspect that can be seen in this quote is the equality between these three female characters. While Dr Watson is in the dark most of the time and Sherlock Holmes explains how he came to his conclusions only at the end, Mary Watson exactly explains her train of thought to Mrs Hudson and Irene Adler. Mrs Hudson shows her appreciation of Mary’s intellect openly to the reader by complementing her. The scenes which take place in Sir George Burnwell’s home also display the importance of teamwork, which stands in strong contrast to the lone wolf detective of the hard-boiled tradition. All three women are necessary to complete the mission: firstly, Irene’s skills of picking locks and disguising are vital; the former to break into the house and the latter to make sure that Sir George Burnwell is led to believe that the burglars were men and not women. Secondly, Mrs Hudson’s observational skills, which stopped them from trying to open the safe and setting off the alarm, seeing as Mrs Hudson noticed that it was connected through wires to an alarm system. Thirdly, Mary Watson’s ability to put herself into other’s people shoes, which leads
62 them directly to Sir George Burnwell’s ledger and letters. After they escaped Mrs Hudson notices their reflections in a shop window and states:
I saw a glimpse of the three of us reflected in the train window as it pulled into the station. For a moment, I barely recognized us. I saw one middle-aged woman, one pretty young woman, and one slender young man. We all looked very respectable and well behaved. There was no hint we’d burgled a well-known seducer, stolen half his secret papers (still stuffed in our clothes), started a fire, been shot at – and got away with it all (Birkby 2016 162).
This quote displays Mrs Hudson’s surprise of what she is capable of. She never would have imagined, being a quiet landlady, that she could break into someone’s home, literally breaking the law, and getting away with it as well. Furthermore, it signals that appearances can deceive and that just because Irene Adler, Mary Watson and Mrs Hudson look like respectable women, it does not mean that they are incapable of challenging and confronting men. These women are not damsels in distress in need of saving, they are more than capable of saving themselves. Mrs Hudson’s continues her development with every visit outside of her home, as for instance when she goes to Adam Ballant’s house to interrogate him, or when she fearlessly questions Mycroft Holmes - a very dangerous, well- connected and powerful man that no one would want to cross. Then, instead of being followed by the Ordinary Man, she follows him. Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson are tired of being in the shadows, they want answers and they do not want to wait for them any longer and ultimately go and get them themselves. With all these visits, interrogations, and speculations they become more and more confident in their own abilities, almost surprised at what they can achieve once they have set their minds to it. When she finds the connection between all the cases – the lawyers with names of Yorkshire cities - it seems that nothing could stop them and she states in excitement: “I was having to suppress the urge to cry ‘the game is afoot!’ No wonder Mr Holmes charged about the entire city when he was solving a case. I felt like I could run from Buckingham Palace to Baker Street in pursuit.” (Birkby 2016 255- 256). The final stage in the women’s development occurs in Richmond, at the blackmailer’s house. They are not afraid anymore and, most importantly, do not feel
63 they are inferior to Sherlock Holmes. On the contrary, they are arguably better than Sherlock Holmes on a communicational and interpersonal level. It is also significant that the chapter in question is titled “Stepping out of the Shadows”, as Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s transformation is completed. Although Mrs Hudson is afraid at first, she would not let her best friend die, she needs to save her at all costs. Mary would act exactly the same, putting Mrs Hudson’s life before her own. Mrs Hudson, seeing Mary tied to a chair and bleeding, is determined to confront the blackmailer and in this part her knowledge of human nature is essential, as she is able to deflect the blackmailer’s attention from Mary onto herself. Mrs Hudson, although she did not operate based on a before-developed strategy, she seems to know exactly what to say and how to behave. Firstly, she flatters and complements the blackmailer on his genius, always giving Sherlock Holmes credit for the information she had on the blackmailer, making sure he would keep perceiving her as a non-threat. When he realizes that it was only a tactic in order for Mary to free herself from her ties, he gets angry and tightens his grip to the gun. As soon as Mrs Hudson realizes that the blackmailer feels powerful holding his gun, she starts to provoke and belittle him, showing him that he is not so special after all (Birkby 289-293). Consequently, the blackmailer becomes angrier and insecure, whilst she feels more and more invigorated, almost intoxicated by the excitement, which becomes clear when she states: “I went on, breathless now, afraid, but somehow intoxicated by how close to the edge I was. I could not have stopped now for all the tea in China” (Birkby 292- 293). This quote shows Mrs Hudson’s determination; whatever the outcome, she would not give up. Even if she wanted to, she simply could not surrender and this arguably was due to all the years of boredom, followed by the investigation - everything led up to that moment. She knows that through her skills she can win and even if she lost, she would not care. After the blackmailer explains to Mrs Hudson why he likes to destroy women, Mrs Hudson’s attitude changes drastically; she is enraged by the blackmailer’s words and can hold back no longer. She declares that it was not Sherlock Holmes who followed the trail the blackmailer had lain out for him, it was her:
“Mr Holmes didn’t follow the clues. He knows nothing about you. I followed the clues. I came tonight, and I came alone. Sherlock Holmes is not coming.” “You’re just the housekeeper. You’re nothing. You are
64 background detail!” “Yes, I was in the background, and standing there, I have watched. I have listened. I have learnt” … “Is that what you’ve been trying to do? Get Sherlock Holmes’ attention? … you weren’t clever enough, I’m afraid. Even I’m bored by you now” … “So this is your final battle, is it? ... Go on, shoot me… but I swear I’ll make you suffer before I die, you miserable little worm of a man. Not with the great Mr Holmes, not even with Dr Watson, but with an ordinary little housekeeper. A woman. What an ending for your game.” The hammer of the gun … but I would not flinch … He was … afraid. I’d had my moment of triumph, even as I was certain I was about to die (Birkby 2016 304-06)
This quote underlines Mrs Hudson’s development, she was in the background but now she is the one facing the blackmailer. Unlike the other women the blackmailer liked to torment and destroy, she is not afraid of him, she fights back. Her words are more powerful than his gun and his secrets and Mrs Hudson has detected the blackmailer’s weak spots and uses this knowledge to her advantage, calling him a little attention-seeking boy in need of approval and reminding him that even a woman is bored with his games. She is able to turn the tables, now she is the one threatening him, telling him that she would do everything in her power to make him suffer and now he is the one who is afraid. She now had her moment of triumph, the moment she was longing for so many years and never thought would come because she was a simple housekeeper. The women’s development is accompanied by self-doubt. Through all the stages of their growth into active characters, the main protagonists’, especially Mrs Hudson’s, self-confidence in her intellectual and practical skills is wavering. As they always compare themselves to Sherlock Holmes they frequently wonder if they are good enough to solve the case or if they should hand it over to the great detective. It can be argued that the reason why Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson often lack self- confidence is not due to their inexperience in the investigative field or their inferior intellect, but due to the shadow of Sherlock Holmes who, especially by Mrs Hudson, has always been put on a pedestal. Mary Watson, on the contrary, does not necessarily perceive Mr Holmes to be an unparalleled detective, which is shown in the way she addresses Sherlock Holmes. While Mrs Hudson always calls him Mr Holmes, Mary Watson addresses him using his first name, even though he calls her
65 Mrs Watson. Mary calling him Sherlock has raised the eyebrows of several characters, including Irene Adler, Adam Ballant, Mycroft Holmes, and Mrs Hudson. Their moments of insecurity and self-doubt are always followed by self- assurance reminding themselves that it is their case and that they cannot hand it over to Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson. Birkby frequently uses the expression “our case” (2016 40) which on one hand underlines the bond between Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson, implying that neither are not alone in this situation and they have each other to count on for support. On the other hand, the expression is often used in relation to “their case” or “his case” referring to Sherlock Holmes’ and Dr Watson’s case, as for instance when Mary Watson states “’[t]his is our case,” Mary said forcefully. “Not his”’ (Birkby 2016 40). The “our” in these excerpts gives the women strength, joy, a sense of righteousness and self-fulfilment and even pride which is shown in the following quotes: “[t]his would be something we would do ourselves, with no interference or ‘help’ from the men upstairs. Our case, our turn to shine, our turn to feel we were achieving something worthwhile” (Birkby 2016 24) or “’[o]ur case’, Mary replied. ‘Our client to protect. Our obligation to fulfil’” (Birkby 2016 40). Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson have listened to the men’s cases so many times, seeing them storm off chasing after criminals while they had to stay at home waiting for the men’s return - it was finally Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s turn. Thus even if they feared they were not good enough for the job, they would not give up their case. The driving force behind their investigation is their compassion for the victimized women. Whenever Mrs Hudson or Mary Watson doubt their abilities or want to lift the weight of this case off their shoulders, they think of the women’s lives the blackmailer has destroyed. Through their sense of compassion and sisterhood they regain the strength and motivation to keep on investigating. It is not only about solving the case but also about freeing the blackmailed women and avenging those women who died at the hands of the blackmailer. Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson’s compassion develops throughout the novel, as at first they take on the case because of Laura Shirley’s plight. Subsequently they realize that she is not the only victim and are thus resolute to save these women. Yet after the Whitechapel Lady’s death and Lillian Rose’s tales about the murdered maids and prostitutes, they are enraged. The case turns out to be far bigger and more complex than they thought but their desire and need to save these victimized women motivates them to persevere.
66 Lillian Rose reproaches Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson for not noticing the deaths of maids and prostitutes, arguing that she expected men not to notice the connection but thought that women would not overlook them, or at least acknowledge these deaths. This raises Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson’s awareness of how many more women were victimized by the blackmailer. Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson want to help these women because at one point in their life they were also controlled by men, which becomes clear after the blackmailer explains to Mrs Hudson and Mary why he chose women, whereafter Mrs Hudson states:
[i]t all came back to me. The patronizing smiles. The men who told me “not to worry my pretty little head”. The doors that were closed to me, the rules that barred me, the small pointless role I was forced to play in my own life. I thought of all women who were afraid and alone, all the women he had destroyed, all the women he had been allowed to destroy, and I thought to myself: I can fight. I can fight the same way he does. He destroys with words – well, I can do that too. (Birkby 2016 304).
This quote displays how the plight of these women functions as a driving force for Mrs Hudson. She makes sure that all the suffering the blackmailer has caused to these women would not go unpunished. She does not perceive him as being superior to her; she knows she can fight the way he does, there is no need for violence, her words are strong enough. With the blackmailer’s death the suicides and murders of the victimized women are avenged and as for those still in fear of the blackmailer’s threats, Mary resolves to send every known victim a letter stating that they are now free.
4.2. De-centering Male Characters – Pushing Men into the Background
Most male characters depicted in this novel are presented in a negative light. They have misogynistic tendencies, thinking of women as inferior to their own gender. In several cases this world-view leads to mistakes on the men’s part. It can be argued that Birkby’s representation of men and women is inverted if compared to Conan Doyle’s depiction. As seen in the previous chapter, women’s agency was limited
67 and they were highly stereotyped since they were mostly portrayed as damsels in distress or femme fatales. Birkby’s exploration of the causes behind the women’s limited agency leads to a reconsideration of these characters. Birkby does not stop at portraying several female characters as victims but explains the reasoning behind their actions, and demonstrates that these women were not victimized because they were not able to act due to a lack of agency but because of external forces. Hence, she depicts the efforts these women made to save themselves and take back control over their lives. A range of efforts can be identified such consulting a detective, manipulating other characters, committing suicide, or investigating and catching the perpetrators. Sherlock Holmes openly admits that he does not perceive women to be equals to men. In several occasions, he states that they are intellectually inferior and that they are necessary for reproductive purposes and other tasks, which are not specified but it can be assumed that these tasks are exclusively performed in the domestic sphere, as for instance cooking, cleaning etc. In fact, Birkby argues that “[h]e called them weak, over-emotional, hysterical, and guilty of dragging a man’s attention away from cool logic” (2016 17). Although he describes Mary Watson as intelligent and organized, she was still labelled “just a woman” (Birkby 2016 114), implying that a woman’s intellectual and organizational skills were still inferior to that of a man’s. Furthermore, he argues that women are too sentimental, focusing on emotions and feelings instead of cool logic and rationality. Following this train of thought, Sherlock Holmes would arguably think of women as being unable to follow clues or solve puzzles, which would explain his surprise and amazement when he realizes that Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson are indeed able to solve the case. Yet Mrs Hudson argues that there are a few women that he likes or at least does not despise. According to Mrs Hudson, these few women were “strong, intelligent and independent” (Birkby 2016 17). Laura Shirley is what Mrs Hudson describes as a “shrinking violet” (Birkby 2016 17), and exemplifies the type of woman Sherlock Holmes despises most. Therefore, when she does not immediately give Sherlock Holmes all the answers, he dismisses her impatiently. The first situation that shook his perception of women was in “A Scandal in Bohemia” when he was beaten by Irene Adler. Dr Watson mentions that it was particularly eye-opening for Sherlock Holmes, as it was not only the first time he was beaten but by a woman as well. From that point onwards, Irene Adler was only ever
68 mentioned by Sherlock Holmes as the woman, which implies that she is the only woman with intellect and skills to match his own. Not only did Irene Adler outwit him but she also provoked him by telling him good night dressed as a boy. Furthermore, she was not only able to disguise herself well enough for Sherlock Holmes not to recognize her but she is able to see through his disguise, and she always stays a step ahead of him. Apart from underestimating Irene’s abilities, Sherlock Holmes makes a second mistake, which is caused by his own over-confidence. After having discovered the secret location of the compromising photograph he was commissioned to retrieve for the King of Bohemia, Sherlock Holmes takes his time, deciding to recover the photograph the next day. All that was left was a photograph of Irene and a cheeky note to Sherlock Holmes telling him that she has already left the country, highlighting his defeat (Birkby 2016 114-116). If Sherlock Holmes had not underestimated her because of her gender, he might have been able to see through her disguise. In fact, Mrs Hudson states that:
Before her [Irene Adler], he had never really respected women as intellectual equals. We were necessary, he supposed, to the continuation of the human race, and to perform certain tasks, but our minds were small and narrow. … And now, not only was he beaten – a rare occasion in itself – but by a woman! From then on, he never underestimated women again. Sometimes I would catch him staring at Mary or me with a puzzled expression as if he no longer knew what to think of us (Birkby 2016 114).
Sherlock Holmes is clearly confused after his defeat caused by Irene Adler. Everything he thought he knew about women was called into questions. Thus, he begins to see Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson in a different light, and he is unsure whether his previous assessment of these women was correct or whether he may have underestimated them as well, since apparently women are indeed able to match his intelligence and skill. At the end of the novel, he realizes that Irene Adler is not the only noteworthy woman. He is both puzzled and amazed at the sight of Mrs Hudson and a bleeding Mary Watson entering 221b Baker Street the night of the fire in Richmond. His admiration of Mrs Hudson increases even more after seeing how she handles Inspector Lestrade and, after Mary has been taken care of, he asks Mrs Hudson what happened. Mrs Hudson refuses to tell him the story but lectures him about his
69 wrongful behaviour towards women, telling him that if he had treated Laura Shirley differently, they would not have taken over the case. Mrs Hudson argues that he was unable to read the signs and therefore states “I had no intention of sending her back to him; he had been heartless at best and cruel at worst, and I was angry with him. He deserved to lose this client; perhaps then he’d better behaved to the next weeping woman” (Birkby 2016 18-19). Sherlock Holmes in the end admits his mistake stating:
“I think I see a pattern I did not see before … A story I was not aware of. People I turned away … I did not find their problems of sufficient complexity. Or I would not allow them to keep their secrets. Or I could not see the despair behind their seemingly trivial requests. I was wrong … “But this time, you were right.” “They needed help. They were lost,” I said to him. “And you found them. As you do with lost souls” (Birkby 2016 329-330).
The conversation between Mrs Hudson and Sherlock Holmes is not between the great detective and his housekeeper anymore, it resembles a conversation between two colleagues who are on an equal level, which is displayed firstly by Holmes’ confession of his mistake, and secondly by his statement that Mrs Hudson was right. Therefore, admitting that she was actually better than him, as she did not overlook these victims and she was able to recognize the pattern. The most misogynistic character is the blackmailer. He describes women as weak and feeble, intellectually inferior to men but most importantly as unworthy adversaries. Consequently, he never perceives Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson to be a threat. This becomes clear when the blackmailer is confused about what Mrs Hudson is doing in his house. He had already forgotten about her, which is exemplified in the following quote when Mrs Hudson tells him that they had already met, his reply is “[o]h.” accompanied by a dismissive hand gesture (Birkby 2016 290). Mrs Hudson then turns to the reader and says “I was of supreme unimportance … I had not played any part in his calculations, either as Mr Holmes’ housekeeper or the woman he met in Whitechapel” (Birkby 2016 290). Furthermore, when Mrs Hudson tells him that it was she who had followed the clues and not Sherlock Holmes, the blackmailer responds “[y]ou’re just a woman. You haven’t the mind to work it out” (Birkby 2016 292). Especially in this scene a strong resonance to Miss
70 Marple’s character is made visible, as Mrs Hudson is perceived by the blackmailer as nothing more than a nosy elderly lady. The blackmailer openly admits to Mrs Hudson that nothing gives him as much pleasure as tearing women’s lives apart. When the blackmailer recounts the first woman he had led to her death, he remembers it as one of the best moments of his life. “[d]o you know, she didn’t cry? Not even beg. She just stood up, walked to the edge of the cliff, and jumped to her death. Oh, it was wonderful! I’d done that, do you understand? I’d taken her life, I had utter control. Do you know how intoxicating that is? (Birkby 2016 299-300). From this quote it becomes transparent that destroying women gives the blackmailer immense pleasure and a sense of power and control. Over the course of time, the blackmailer refined and perfected his technique in order to slow down the process of destruction. This way he could enjoy his power for longer. Therefore, his plans to destroy lives are planned down to the last detail, which is exemplified in the Whitechapel Lady’s case: first he threatened her, telling her that he got hold of letters she had written to a former lover and that the blackmailer knew that she had been intimate with him before marriage. Then he would appear at every party, gala or other social gatherings and whisper in her ear, telling her that it would be his pleasure to inform her husband about her past behaviour, and if the husband would not believe him, then he would make up lies about the victim. The reason why the blackmailer was confident that the Whitechapel Lady’s husband would believe that the letters were real was because he had used exactly the same paper she used. He carefully copied her handwriting and also made use of a similar linguistic style. Furthermore, he had already created a divide between the couple by constantly whispering words into the Whitechapel Lady’s and her husband’s ear and when she confronted him, scared of what the blackmailer could have told him, his reply was always that they had talked about nothing. By creating a bitter atmosphere, the blackmailer destroyed all trust between them. When the Whitechapel Lady and her husband had reached their lowest point in their relationship, he sent the letters (Birkby 2016 83-91).
“It’s all very clever,” Mary mused, her eyes dark and troubled. “If you wrote the innocent letters, why not the other ones? If you lay with your fiancé before marriage, why would you not have lain with others? He is creating lies based on truth – a very small amount of truth and a huge mass of lies, but it is enough to rouse suspicion.” “Suspicion is what he
71 thrives on,” the Whitechapel Lady said bitterly. “It is meat and bread to him. You must understand, when he brought me the letters, and I saw I had no escape, I asked him what the price was. He refused to tell me (Birkby 2016 88).
This quote shows exactly how the blackmailer operated and planted the seed of fear in his victims, creating suspicion and mistrust before giving them the coup de grace and, quite notably, he does not tell them his price.
4.3. Birkby’s Views on Marriage
Margaret Fuller’s work Woman in the Nineteenth Century lends itself as basis for analysis of the various types of marriages Birkby depicts in her novel. Fuller depicts three types of marriage based on inequality, the first one being the so-called “household partnership” which consists of a relationship with specific assigned gender roles (Fuller). Men go to work, while women stay at home looking after the household and their children. This type of marriage is not solely built on love but on practicality and a mutual admiration for the other as long as their roles are respected (Fuller). The “household partnership” was a common phenomenon in the 19th century, as unmarried women in her twenties were stigmatized (Fuller). The second type of marriage is, as she calls it, “idolatry” (Fuller), which is based on physical admiration. Since the grounds of this type of marriage are superficial, Fuller implies that the people involved are superficial as well (Fuller). This type of marriage is destined to fail because looks will fade and since it is the only base of the marriage, they will not have anything else to fall back on (Fuller). Thus, the people involved in this type of marriage will grow resentful towards each other throughout the rest of their lives since divorce was not as common and socially accepted in the 19th century (Fuller). The third type of marriage is the “intellectual companionship” (Fuller). In this relationship men and women are intellectual equals, hence women were not excepted to exclusively stay at home to take care of the household and their children while men were moving in the public sphere (Fuller). Yet this type of marriage is not ideal because it is based on intellectual admiration and friendship
72 and not on love. The fourth and final type of marriage is the ideal one, since it is based on the equality of two people (Fuller). Mary and Dr Watson’s marriage is the ideal form of marriage according to Margaret Fuller’s typology of marriage, as it is a relationship between two equals. Dr Watson would never perceive his wife as inferior to him. In fact, before proposing to her he was sure that he was inferior to her because, from a financial point of view, he could not provide for her as he had wanted to. Their marriage is based on love, mutual respect and trust. Mary Watson argues that the blackmailer would never be able to blackmail her by threatening to spread lies about her because her husband knows and trusts her, and thus would never believe the blackmailer over her. Dr Watson trusts his wife blindly as it is shown in the following quote.
Mr Holmes hesitated, and then he said, in a low voice, “I don’t like to say this to you, but she’s up to something. Mrs Watson, I mean. And maybe Mrs Hudson, too”. “Probably,” John said, very unconcernedly. … She is keeping a secret, I am sure,” Mr Holmes said … “Are you not curious?” “Very. But she will tell me what she has been doing eventually, just as eventually I will tell her what I’ve been doing all day with you.” … “Look, Holmes, I love my wife with all my heart and soul, and I am certain she loves me the same way.” … “But,” John continued, “I spend most of my free time running around solving cases with you – which I enjoy greatly, and which has given me a good deal of satisfaction, not to mention a wife. She has never once objected to my time with you – in fact, she encourages it. … If she, in her turn, wishes to spend her free time with Mrs Hudson doing something that interests them far more than sewing shirts and baking cakes, then I have no objection” (Birkby 2016 58-59).
The fact that Dr Watson openly admits to keeping secrets from her and not providing a reason why she could not keep secrets from him, underlines the equality between the them. Dr Watson does not perceive her as inferior in any way. An analogous parallel occurs when he tells Sherlock Holmes that he loves her the same way she loves him, again highlighting that they are on the same level. Furthermore, he knows that his wife is intelligent and does not feel challenged enough. After the women have escaped from the blackmailer and Mary is lying unconscious and bleeding on the kitchen table, Dr Watson is worried to death. At that point he wants to know what happened but as his wife still refuses to tell him and asks him to trust her, he
73 eventually accepts that Mary will tell him about their adventure when she feels ready. It is significant that Dr Watson is not angry with her even though she risked her life, and that is arguably because he really knows his wife and therefore knows that she will learn from this situation. Their relationship is based on mutual respect, trust, love and support. Therefore, their marriage embodies the qualities Fuller described as the ideal marriage. The marriage between Irene Adler and Godfrey Norton is also progressive for the Victorian period. Like the Watson’s marriage, it is based on equality and thus represents the ideal form as outlined by Margaret Fuller. Irene is a victim of the blackmailer as well, yet she is not afraid of her husband’s reaction. In fact, when the blackmailer sends Mr Norton the package containing Irene’s secrets, he reads them all and simply asks his wife if the blackmailer was telling the truth. After confirming it, she reassured him that these secrets represented her past and not her present life. He accepts her explanation and never speaks of it again (Birkby 170-173). His reaction can only be explained by deep trust and respect for his wife. Furthermore, the fact that he accepts his wife for who she is - a woman who often shows questionable behaviour and rejects the judgement of others and society - shows that he truly loves her and that he perceives her to be his equal no matter what others think of her. Birkby displays this as well when Sherlock Holmes asks why Irene is not accompanied by her husband to her visit to England. She replies:
It is true, I am here alone, but I am here investigating these letters, with both his knowledge and blessing. Business affairs keep him in the States, but if I call, he will come. He will be calm, he will be magnanimous, he will be reasonable and he will love me with all his heart and soul. He will never throw my past in my face, and he will never walk away from me unless I behave dishonourably. That is the man I married (Birkby 2016 173-174).
It is clear from this quote that Irene’s husband fully respects and trusts her, letting her travel alone to England to investigate the letters he had received from the blackmailer. Furthermore, the fact that he does not resent her for her past underlines that he truly loves her no matter what she had done. The way Irene talks about her husband highlights her feelings towards Mr Norton as well; she loves him and admires him for his calm and understanding nature - qualities most men lacked due
74 to their superior attitudes towards women in the 19th century. Irene does not conform to the standards of the Victorian Period. She is a modern and independent woman, who values her independence and would never compromise it for marriage. Even though she has a career of her own, makes her own decisions and does not conform to society’s expectations, she is happily married. Hence, it can be argued that Birkby puts forward the idea that professional self-fulfilments and unconformity do not automatically exclude a successful personal life. This presents a contrary position to common assumptions of feminism at that time. At the turn of the century they harshly criticized marriage, arguing that it confined women to the domestic sphere, thus inhibiting them from personal self-fulfilment. It is interesting to note how several characters assumed upon Irene’s return to England that her marriage had failed. Assumedly Mrs Hudson did not consider the option that Irene was still happily married because of Irene’s unconventional nature. Irene herself suggests that she is surprised at how her marriage was still blissful, stating that “given both my past and my nature, no one is more surprised at this turn of events than I, but I am happy” (Birkby 2016 119). Though skilled, intelligent and highly unconventional Mr Norton did not feel intimidated by Irene and did not perceive her as unmarriageable, as a considerable amount of men would in Fuller’s eyes. While the Watsons and the Nortons represent progressive forms of marriages, the Shirley’s marriage stands for the old-fashioned type of marriage based on inequality, which is the one feminists harshly criticized at the end of the century. The inequality between the Shirley’s inevitably places her husband on top. In fact, the main reason why Laura Shirley did not open up to Sherlock Holmes was her fear that he would go to her husband and tell him everything. Within their marriage it was Laura Shirley’s husband who made all the decisions regarding both their lives, and he appears to value reputation more than his wife as a person. Laura Shirley recollects that “[h]e says that a woman’s reputation is a price above rubies, and is her most precious possession, and that nothing should stain it, not even rumours” (Birkby 2016 19). Consequently, he forbade his wife to see her friends after rumours about their alleged indiscrete behaviour surfaced. When she replied that there was no proof that these rumours were true, he argued that to him rumours were proof enough, since there would be no reason for making up rumours if a woman behaved decently. He then concluded stating that “even lies had a basis in truth” (Birkby 2016 19). From this short quote it is clear that although he may love
75 his wife, appearance and reputation were more important to him and that if there were rumours about certain people, one should not associate themselves any longer with them. Thus, it can be argued that Laura Shirley had every reason to be afraid that once this letters were sent to her husband, he would leave her immediately without even confronting her. After hearing Laura Shirley’s description of her husband, Mrs Hudson turns to the reader and states “[s]o, he was one of those husbands!” (Birkby 2016 19). This comment, though short, is meaningful and should not be overlooked, as it not only implies that Mrs Hudson does not have a high opinion of this type of husbands, but that they were quite common and readily recognizable at that time. Although there is not enough evidence in the text to clearly name the Shirley’s marriage in Fuller’s terms, it can be said for certain that it does not represent the ideal form of marriage. By a process of elimination it could be argued that the marriage between Laura and her husband is either a “household companionship” or a marriage based on “idolatry”, since due to the husband’s superior position it cannot be an “intellectual companionship”, and as already mentioned it is certainly not the “ideal marriage”. Even though the Whitechapel Lady does not inform the reader in detail about the character of her husband, based on his reaction his way of thinking was analogous to Mr Shirley’s, and thus their marriage can be considered a mixture of “idolatry” and “household companionship” as well using Margaret Fuller’s terms. After having created a division between the Whitechapel Lady and her husband by tormenting her with whispers, the blackmailer gave the final blow and sent the letters to her husband. By that time, there was no trust between the pair anymore and because of that he did not even confront his wife about the letters - not even asking for an explanation or wanting to know if they were true. He simply shot himself. As already mentioned, the blackmailer based his lies on nuggets of truth, implying that the husband was not the only man the Whitechapel Lady had lain with prior to being married. He simply could not live with the alleged sins his wife had committed, dreading what people would think of her and of him. Yet his reaction is contradictory, as he values reputation and appearance so highly, and suicide was considered scandalous and sinful.
I found him in the study, the letters scattered before him, the gun still in his hand, all life gone.” She stopped. She could not go on. “I think
76 we can guess the rest,” Mary said gently. “You burnt the letters? And the verdict of the inquest was death by misadventure? The gun went off accidentally whilst he was cleaning, was that the story?” “That is exactly,” the Lady said darkly. “How well you understand the way we cover up our scandals.” (Birkby 2016 89).
Mary explains that covering up a suicide as an accident was a common practice during this time, a time where appearances mattered more than anything else. She copied Dr Watson’s medical reports and, for example, accidental deaths while cleaning guns were not a rare occasion, implying the consequences certain rumours and scandals could have in Victorian England. The husband’s suicide is also an indicator of the inequality between the two parties in this marriage, as he committed suicide one on hand, as he could not bear that his wife had allegedly done these terrible things (not specified in the book), and on the other hand, because he could not stand other people’s judgment. Thus, his suicide was arguably an act of egoism, leaving his wife to live with the consequences of the blackmailer’s lies and her husband’s suicide.
77 5. Sherlock’s Re-Interpretatiorn of Gender Roles and Female Stereotypes
While Birkby’s revisionism occurs by changing the narrator from Dr Watson to Mrs Hudson, the modernization of Conan Doyle’s work occurs in the BBC series Sherlock by updating the setting to the present-day. Although the BBC series does not depict female detectives, it still portrays interesting female characters of the Sherlock Holmes canon. The change of setting offers various possibilities for the female characters regarding their agency. Sherlock exemplifies female independence and agency especially in its portrayal of professional women. The attitude in the 21st century towards women has drastically changed compared to the discrimination in the Victorian period based on gender as through the emancipation of women the hierarchy and inequality between the two sexes has decreased. As a result, the women’s portrayal in novels and in television has changed as well.
5.1. Molly Hooper and the Professionalization of Women
During the period in which Conan Doyle wrote his novels and short stories featuring Sherlock Holmes, the jobs accessible to women were limited. In fact, Margaret Baeston lists in her book Professional Women Upon Their Professions: Conversations the occupations open for women during the late Victorian period. Among them are mainly professions relating to education, domestic work, nursing, office work, and the arts (xi-xii). Nevertheless, she also mentions dentistry and stockbroking (Baeston xi). Therefore, it is shown that towards the turn of the century the possibilities for women to work had already expanded. However, Danielova argues that the professions of the female characters portrayed in Conan Doyle’s stories are limited to the occupations of governess, teacher, clerk and various jobs within the domestic field, e.g. cooks, maids, and governesses (Danielova 34). Therefore, it can be argued that although the occupations accessible to women in the late Victorian period increased compared to the first half of the 19th century,
78 Conan Doyle seems to prefer his female characters to move within a more restricted professional field. As the BBC series recontextualizes Conan Doyle’s stories in 21st century London, the position of women in the professional world differs considerably. For instance, Molly Hooper works as a pathologist at the morgue of St. Bartholomew’s Hospital. The list of professions open to women in the late Victorian period shows that even though the array of occupations for women had expanded, apart from nurses and dentists, women were absent from the medical and scientific field. Further evidence for the absence of women within the medical field is shown in the episode “The Abominable Bride”. As this episode is set in the Victorian period, the creators of Sherlock struggled at first to find a plausible way for Molly Hooper to be featured in this episode, as female doctors were, according to Jennifer Philipps “unthinkable in Conan Doyle’s time” (174). In fact, as has been argued in the third chapter, the common assumption in the Victorian period was that women were intellectually inferior to men from a biological perspective, and were thus banned from pursuing a career within the medical field. The creators Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat finally came up with a solution and decided not to strip Molly Hooper of her agency and medical expertise but to have her disguised as a male pathologist instead, and, in this way demonstrating that a woman was as capable as a man of performing this job. The fact that Sherlock Holmes relies on Molly Hooper’s medical information signifies how skilled and smart Molly actually is, as Sherlock Holmes has the tendency to see himself intellectually superior than the others. This is well displayed by comments he makes such as “[d]ear God. What is it like in your funny little brains? It must be so boring” (“A Study in Pink” Sherlock 00:28:01-00:28:05), “Anderson don’t talk out loud, you lower the IQ of the whole street” (“A Study in Pink” Sherlock 01:00:39-01:00:43) or “I dislike being outnumbered. It makes for too much stupid in the room” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:57:53-00:57:58). Even though Sherlock Holmes appreciates Dr Watson’s input, John is not immune to Sherlock’s insults of this type. However, although Sherlock humiliates Molly on several occasions, he never insults her intellect or questions her medical expertise. In fact, he regularly consults her about bruises, bones, and poisons or waits for the results of her autopsies to solve his cases. Therefore, it can be argued that if even Sherlock
79 Holmes, the great detective, relies on Molly Hooper’s medical expertise, she must be a skilled pathologist. Mark Gatiss and Steven Moffat’s decision to assign the role of the forensic expert to a woman can be considered neither progressive nor innovative. In fact, in her article “From crime lab to mind palace: post CSI-forensics in Sherlock” Sofia Bull, lecturer in Film at the University of Southampton, argues that female scientists have been depicted on television since the mid 1990s and mentions Catherine Willows in CSI, Dr Temperance Brennan in Bones and Dr Jordan Cavanaugh in Crossing Jordan as examples (Bull 335). However, it is important to note that Molly Hooper differs considerably from her forerunners as Bull explains that while previously depicted female forensic scientists appear to be exclusively career- driven, and consequently sacrifice their personal life, Molly Hooper’s persona is characterized by her emotions, sensitivity and kindness (335). Similarly, Amy Thomas, one of the Baker Street Babes, argues that the fourth season of Sherlock “showed Molly’s emotional complexity and the coexistence of her vulnerability and fierceness” (38). Molly Hooper’s clothes are arguably an indicator of her duality. On one hand she is Specialist Registrar which is symbolized by the lab coat. One the other hand, she is shown to be wearing girlish clothes underneath, symbolizing her sensitivity, emotions and the girlish crush she has on Sherlock. Philipps argues that in the first season the girlish aspect is more prominent, as the focus is on Molly’s crush on Sherlock and her awkward attempts to ask him out (170). However, over the course of the series, Molly Hooper’s professionality and competence move into to the foreground, as the other characters come to appreciate her medical knowledge and expertise. Sherlock Holmes in particular values her skills and professional advice, asking Molly Hooper several times for help for his cases. The next exchanges between Sherlock and Molly show how their relationship changed.
MOLLY: Listen, I was wondering… maybe later, when you’re finished- SHERLOCK: You’re wearing lipstick. You weren’t wearing lipstick before. MOLLY: I uh, I refreshed it a bit. SHERLOCK: Sorry, you were saying? MOLLY: I was wondering if you’d like to have coffee. SHERLOCK: Black. Two sugars please. I’ll be upstairs. [He exits]
80 MOLLY [to herself]: Okay. (“A Study in Pink” Sherlock 00:09:00-00:09:19)
MOLLY: Sherlock. What was today about? SHERLOCK: Saying thank you. MOLLY: For what? SHERLOCK: For everything you did for me. MOLLY: It’s okay. It was my pleasure. SHERLOCK: No. I mean it. MOLLY: I don’t mean pleasure. I mean I didn’t mind. I wanted to. SHERLOCK: Moriarty slipped up, he made a mistake. Because the one person he thought didn’t matter at all to me was the one person who mattered most. You made it all possible. But you can’t do this again, can you? (“The Empty Hearse” Sherlock 00:47:45-00:48:19)
In the dialogue of the pilot episode “A Study in Pink”, Sherlock does not acknowledge Molly as a woman or a possible love interest. In fact, he acts dismissively towards her and only visits her when he needs information for a case. In the third season he then values not only Molly as a skilled medical examiner, but as a person as well. While the Molly Hooper portrayed in season one would have been glad to only spend the day with Sherlock without second-guessing his motives, the new Molly wants to know why. In fact, Philipps states that “[m]uch of the reaction to Molly, especially from season two onwards, focuses on her strength and resilience as well as the development of her relationship with Sherlock” (171). Molly Hooper is no longer the shy, intelligent, awkward girl from the pilot episode, but rather a competent woman who is not afraid to confront Sherlock and point out his flaws. In “A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock humiliates Molly Hooper and she replies by saying “[y]ou always say such horrible things” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:43:36-00:43:38) to which he simply replies “I am sorry. Forgive me” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:43:39-00:43:41). Out of context it would seem like a typical response to Molly’s statement but in Sherlock’s case it is an extraordinary occurrence, which is demonstrated by Dr Watson’s reaction of disbelief, unsure if he had misheard Sherlock. Thus, Molly Hooper is the first person in the series Sherlock apologizes to for his rude behaviour. Another important scene which depicts the development of Sherlock’s and Molly’s relationship occurs in “His Last Vow” in which Molly reprimands Sherlock for his substance abuse saying
81 “[c]lean? [she walks over to Sherlock and slaps him. A lot]. How dare you throw away the beautiful gifts you were born with. And how dare you betray the love of your friends! Say you’re sorry“ (“His Last Vow” Sherlock 00:12:06-00:12:21). The fact that she is scorning Sherlock, shows how far she has come, there is no trace of her awkward shyness left. Thus, it can be argued that it is due to Sherlock constantly belittling her that she perceived herself as inferior to him. By the third season, however, she has gained self-confidence and determination and has recognized that she is equal to Sherlock. Sensitivity and emotions are evoked by Molly Hooper’s character even in Sherlock Holmes when interacting with her at times. Therefore, it can be said that Molly’s focus on emotions influences Sherlock Holmes to the point of rendering him more human-like. In fact, in an interview with the New York Times Louise Brealey, the actress portraying Molly Hooper, commented saying that “[s]he doesn’t just have a crush on Sherlock. She sees something in him, a humanity, that no one else before John was able to see, because he can behave in such a monstrous way” (Sulcas). In fact, Philipps argues that “as the series develops, Molly is shown giving more and more professional and personal assistance to Sherlock in his investigations as well as his life” (182). Similarly, Thomas argues that “Molly’s growth takes her from a dupe to a queen, a woman whose ability to stand up for herself and for what is best for her friends ultimately affects Sherlock’s own character. He becomes a better person as a result of trusting and knowing her” (40). Based on these statements it is clearly visible that Molly is as valuable to Sherlock as Watson is. Although the role of a female medical examiner is not innovative, Molly Hooper can be considered a role model for women. She displays a high degree of agency, works in a male-dominated field, is smart and learns to stand up for herself and for what she believes in. Along these same lines Philipps argues that Molly Hopper is “more like ‘The Woman,’ than Irene Adler, in that she is the only woman to beat Sherlock” (182). Even though there is no real competition between the two characters, Molly comes out as the winner in every interaction she has with Sherlock in the later seasons, which is not the case with Sherlock’s Irene Adler. Molly Hooper is not the only female character performing a job, which would not have been accessible to women in the Victorian period. Mary Watson was, before becoming a nurse, working for the CIA and then as a spy and assassin. Already in the episode “His Last Vow” the audience discovers that Mary is not who
82 she seems to be. Charles Augustus Magnussen is aware of her past and blackmails her. In an attempt to kill Magnussen, Mary is interrupted by Sherlock and shoots him. Throughout the season there were hints that Mary was intelligent and probably smarter than Dr Watson, as she was able to recognize a skip code immediately and there was evidence of her retentive memory. When Sherlock confronts Mary he provokes her by saying “I want to know how good you are. Go on, show me, the doctor’s wife must be a little bored right now” (“His Last Vow” Sherlock 00:50:15- 00:50:22). Mary then throws 50 pence in the air and shoots a hole through it. Further evidence of her excellent shooting skills is demonstrated in the scene in which she shoots Sherlock, as she only wanted to wound and not to kill him, which would have needed an extremely precise shot. In fact, Sherlock Holmes says when describing the shot that “[t]hat wasn’t a miss. That was surgery” (“His Last Vow” Sherlock 00:51:07-00:51:12). In the episode “The Six Thatchers” the audience then discovers Mary’s secret when a former member of her team tries to kill her. When she tells Watson and Sherlock about her past she mentions that A.G.R.A was the best team for rescue missions or assassinations. Sherlock also acknowledges that in certain situations Mary is better equipped than Dr Watson, which is explicitly stated in the episode “The Six Thatchers”, when Dr Watson sees Mary and Rosie:
WATSON: Mary what are you… ? We, we agreed we would never bring Rosie out on a case MARY: Yeah, exactly so… [hands Rosie to Dr Watson] Don’t wait up. Hey Sherlock SHERLOCK: Hey WATSON: But Mary what are you doing here? SHERLOCK: She’s better at this than you WATSON: Better? SHERLOCK: So I texted her WATSON: Hang on, Mary is better than me? SHERLOCK: Well, she is a retired super-agent with a terrifying skillset. Of course she’s better (“The Six Thatchers” Sherlock 00:29:56-00:30:14)
In this exchange Sherlock explicitly tells Dr Watson that because of Mary’s past and skill-set she is better at following trails. The fact that even Sherlock Holmes acknowledges and appreciates her skills is an indicator of her competence, professionality and agency. However, in the end like several female detectives such
83 as Dorcas Dene and Hagar Stanley, she decides to renounce her professional career in exchange for a blissful marriage and motherhood. Not only does Sherlock display women in a variety of professions but it depicts several female characters in positions of power and authority as well, which would have been unthinkable in the Victorian period. Lady Smallwood, for instance, is a member of the English parliament and part of a secret government committee and Sally Donovan is a Sergeant of the New Scotland Yard. Therefore, compared to the original Sherlock Holmes stories, there is not only a change in the multitude of professions accessible to women, but a variety of these working women occupy positions of power. Nevertheless, although the BBC series Sherlock depicts women in positons of power within the professional world, they are arguably portrayed to be more vulnerable to male power shortly after their introduction, and thus diminishes their power and agency. In fact, in the very first episode “A Study in Pink” the audience is introduced to Sally Donovan and Philip Anderson – a sergeant and a member of the forensic team respectively. Sherlock Holmes suggests that she did not sleep at home the night before and that Anderson’s wife must be away. When Donovan and Anderson request an explanation to how he came to his conclusion, Sherlock replies
SHERLOCK: Your deodorant told me that. ANDERSON: My deodorant? SHERLOCK: It’s for men. ANDERSON: Well, of course, it’s for men, I’m wearing it. SHERLOCK: So is Sergeant Donovan. Oh I think it just vaporised. May I go in? ANDERSON: Now look, whatever you’re trying to imply… SHERLOCK: I’m not implying anything, I’m sure Sally came around for a nice little chat, and just happened to stay over and I assume she scrubbed your floors going by the state of her knees. (“A Study in Pink” Sherlock 00:22:32-00:22:56)
This short exchange shows how Sherlock diminishes Sergeant Donovan’s power and agency by labelling her as a “mistress” in front of the forensic team, stripping her of the acquired respect among her colleagues and potentially causing her colleagues to no longer take her seriously in her position of authority. Furthermore, the statement about Donovan’s knees is especially degrading as it implies firstly that
84 exclusively women scrub floors, and secondly that she hurt her knees during a sexual act, reducing her character to her body and its functions only. Thus, shifting the focus from her professional competence and skills to her private life which parallels to the shift from the public to the domestic sphere of the Victorian period. Therefore, it would seem that the writers and producers of the series either unconsciously or consciously want Sally Donovan to remain within the domestic sphere. A similar occurrence can be detected with Lady Elizabeth Smallwood’s character. As already mentioned before, she is a member of Parliament and, therefore, an influential, authoritative and powerful woman. Nevertheless, in the episode “His Last Vow” almost immediately after being introduced as this influential woman, she is belittled by Charles Augustus Magnussen’s attempts of blackmail. There is a resemblance to Birkby’s portrayal of blackmail because in this case it is also about saving the husband’s reputation. However, there is a twist since it is not Lady Smallwood who has committed these incriminatory acts but her husband. Therefore, she has to pay the price for her husband’s actions and diminish her power and agency by complying to Magnussen’s demands. Based on this analysis, it can be argued that although the show’s writers and producers promote powerful women to some extent within the working environment, there are several instances in which they are stripped of their powers and defined by circumstances occurring in their private life, thus minimizing their professionality and competence and maximizing their personal matters. This is unquestionably sexist, as men are very rarely belittled due to their sexual relationships in and out of marriage. However, compared to the Victorian period where women portrayed in fiction had to choose between their professional and their personal life, as has been argued in the third chapter, this 21st century adaptation allows women to achieve both a successful career as well as established intimate relationships, demonstrating that a woman in the 21st century does not have to renounce her personal life in order to achieve success in the professional world.
85 5.2. Mrs Hudson and the Art of Manipulation
Sherlock’s initial depiction of Mrs Hudson steers towards a stereotypical elderly and frail lady. In fact, Charlotte Beyer describes Mrs Hudson in her essay “’I, Too, Mourn the Loss’: Mrs Hudson and the Absence of Sherlock Holmes” as “a physically petite, non-threatening elderly lady who gives the impression – through her voice and intonation, as well as her visual appearance – of being somewhat frail and vulnerable” (68). As Beyer points out upon first meeting Mrs Hudson, frailty and harmlessness seem to be her defining characteristics, which are significant to the dynamic with the main protagonists, as her frailty implies the need for protection by Sherlock and Dr Watson. The fact that she is non-threatening indicates that she will not try to invade the men’s realm of detection. Her voice and intonation which are often filled with worry convey her maternal instincts towards “her boys” - Sherlock and John Watson - as they frequently put themselves in dangerous situations and Mrs Hudson waits at home worrying about their safety. Una Stubbs, the actress portraying Mrs Hudson, confirmed this in “Sherlock Uncovered: The Women” stating that “because I am a mother of three sons that maybe, it would be nice to be motherly with them, and care about them and I think that’s worked quite well” (“Sherlock Uncovered” 00:17:34-00:17:44). Mrs Hudson’s maternal instincts gear arguably towards the stereotypical elderly woman, who is lonely and gladly takes care of other people as if they were her own children. However, while Mrs Hudson’s appearance, her voice and several of her behavioural patterns would suggest that she conforms to the stereotype of the elderly woman, there are as many instances that would indicate the contrary. In the episode “His Last Vow” the audience discovers more about Mrs Hudson’s past, e.g. that she was an “exotic dancer” (“His Last Vow” Sherlock 00:23:13) and a “semi- reformed alcoholic” (“His Last Vow” Sherlock 00:23:13). Charles Augustus Magnussen’s analysis of Mrs Hudson reveals also that she has a considerable amount of debts and that her pressure point is her use of medicinal marijuana. These elements are not considered stereotypical for a proper elderly lady, especially if compared to Conan Doyle’s Mrs Hudson. In fact, Maria Fleischhack, one of the Baker Street Babes, writes “[w]e’ve never had an alcoholic, marijuana-smoking, exotic-dancing, Aston-Martin-driving, and phone-in-bra-hiding Mrs Hudson” (48).
86 Not only does Mrs Hudson display habits and behavioural patterns which are considered unconventional for an elderly lady, but she is also able to hide these unorthodox characteristics when she tries to manipulate people, making her a multi- dimensional character. In the episode “A Scandal in Belgravia” three American CIA agents take Mrs Hudson hostage at 221b in order to swap Mrs Hudson for Irene Adler’s phone. During this scene Mrs Hudson is shown weeping and trembling displaying a more fragile woman than she actually is. After the CIA agents have been arrested Mrs Hudson appears to be shaken by the events and Dr Watson suggests that 221b Baker Street is not safe for her until the case is solved. When Dr Watson asks about the whereabouts of Irene Adler’s phone, Sherlock replies:
SHERLOCK: Safest place I know [looking at Mrs Hudson] MRS HUDSON [taking the phone out of her bra, grinning]: He left it in the pocket of his second best dressing gown, you clot. I managed to sneak it out when they thought I was having a cry. [laughing] SHERLOCK: Shame on you, John Watson! WATSON: Shame on me? SHERLOCK: Mrs Hudson leave Baker Street? England would fall! [puts his arm around her shoulders] (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 01:00:48-01:01:07)
This exchange shows how Mrs Hudson is able to take advantage of female stereotypes, letting other people think that she is fragile and helpless when in truth she is one of the few characters of the series who is capable of understanding Sherlock and his way of thinking. Furthermore, Sherlock’s statement that “England would fall!” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 01:01:07) if Mrs Hudson left 221b Baker Street implies her importance not only to Sherlock but to 221b Baker Street, signifying that she is the heart and soul of the house. She also used her image of the frail, easily manipulated, naïve woman at the trial of her late husband, who was accused of running a drug cartel. If it had not been for her acting skills, she probably would have been arrested too, since she was typing reports and bank statements. The reason she was considered innocent was due to her ability to act as if she were helpless and naïve, leading the jury to believe that she was unaware of her husband’s actual business. Mrs Hudson has assumed a maternal role for Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson. They perceive her as a maternal figure, and thus would do everything in
87 their power to make her happy. Mrs Hudson knows very well that whenever she is upset or sad, the boys will try their hardest to comfort her and will never deny her any request. Throughout the series it can be seen how Mrs Hudson manipulates Sherlock Holmes and especially Dr Watson, weeping and pretending to be upset in order to achieve her goals. The following scene (“The Lying Detective” Sherlock 00:26:53-00:32:26) sums up Mrs Hudson’s unconventionality, unexpectedness, and manipulation techniques. An Aston Martin is shown driving at high speed, chased by the police. When the car arrives at Dr Watson’s therapist’s home, Mrs Hudson steps out of the car leaving Dr Watson speechless. The police officer demands to know, whether Mrs Hudson realized at what speed she was driving, to which she replies in a casual tone “[n]o. Of course not, I was on the phone” (“The Lying Detective” Sherlock 00:27:50-00:27:53). She hugs John and tells him what she has been through because of Sherlock, and that John needs to help the both of them. When he refuses, Mrs Hudson immediately slips into her maternal role, scorning John as if she were a disappointed mother saying: “[n]ow, you just listen to me for once in your stupid life. I know Mary’s dead and I know your heart is broken. But if Sherlock dies too, who’ll you have then? Because I’ll tell you something, John Watson. You will not have me!” (“The Lying Detective” Sherlock 00:30:06-00:30:18) and storms out of the house crying. Knowing that she has almost convinced Dr Watson, she makes him promise that he will examine Sherlock Holmes if he per- chance meets him. Since Mrs Hudson is a very smart woman, she knew that John Watson would react in exactly this way, and therefore opens the trunk of the car, where a handcuffed Sherlock Holmes is lying, whom she forced into the car at gun point. This scene shows that Mrs Hudson is not only able to outsmart Dr Watson but Sherlock Holmes too, as she pretended to be afraid of him and when the moment was right she seized his gun and pointed it at him saying: “[r]ight then, mister. Now I need your handcuffs. I happen to know there’s a pair in the salad drawer. I’ve borrowed them before. Oh, get over yourself. You’re not my first smack- head, Sherlock Holmes” (“The Lying Detective” Sherlock 00:31:40-00:31:53). Mrs Hudson knows how to trick her boys with her acting skills. Yet it seems that Mrs Hudson is unaware of how excellent her acting skills are, because she gets annoyed when Dr Watson and Sherlock Holmes are surprised by her sometimes unconventional behavioural patterns, as for instance when John is surprised that Mrs Hudson owns an Aston Martin she replies “[o]h, for God’s sake! I’m the widow
88 of a drug dealer. I own property in Central London. And for the last bloody time, John, I’m not your housekeeper!” (“The Lying Detective” Sherlock 00:32:17- 00:32:26). It is in these few scenes that Mrs Hudson’s real potential is displayed, which demonstrate that while she appears to have a limited agency, arguably directly connected to her limited screen time, she is one of the only characters who has a direct influence on Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson and therefore the unfolding of events as well. Moreover, the scenes in question show how resourceful and smart Mrs Hudson actually is. Even though she is saved by Mr Holmes several times, she is certainly not a helpless elderly lady but a woman who displays a high degree of agency when action is needed regardless of how dangerous the situation might be.
5.3. Irene Adler and the Sexualisation of the Female Body
The BBC series Sherlock has adapted Conan Doyle’s short story “A Scandal in Bohemia” in the episode “A Scandal in Belgravia” starring Sherlock’s version of Irene Adler. While in Conan Doyle’s story she was an opera singer and adventuress, her modern BBC counterpart is a dominatrix. In fact, Primorac argues that “[t]he writers of the episode, Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss, effectively diminish Adler’s agency even more than Ritchie’s films or Doherty’s show. The opera singer… here becomes a willowy dominatrix who blackmails her clients by photographing them in compromising positions” (2018 40). Already in the first two scene featuring Irene Adler the focus is on her female body as well as on her display of elements of femininity and her sexuality: In the first scene she is only wearing black underwear. She is shown entering a room where a person is restrained on a bed, striking the whip on the wall and asking “[h]ave you been wicked, Your Highness?” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:03:37- 00:03:41) to which the person on the bed replies “[y]es, Miss Adler” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:03:42-00:03:43). The second scene strongly resembles the first one, as she is only clothed in a black sheer robe with black lingerie underneath. Yet the several shots of this scene focus on Irene Adler’s hands as well: she is wearing a diamond ring on her finger, her nails are long and painted with red nail
89 polish. Then her hand is shown gliding slowly over a newspaper which shows a picture of Sherlock Holmes. This slow hand movement is reminiscent of a person stroking a loved one. Then she is shown again with her whip in her hand, as if preparing for a battle. The fact that the directors decided not to show her face but only her body already foreshadows the heavily body-focusing trend of the episode. The first part of “A Scandal in Belgravia” is characterized by a series of contrasts and parallels between Irene Adler and Sherlock: on the one hand it is Irene Adler, notorious dominatrix. On the other hand, it is the asexual Sherlock Holmes, nicknamed “the virgin” by James Moriarty. While Sherlock Holmes is looking at Irene’s provocative pictures on her website “The Woman”, she is shown looking at pictures of Holmes on her phone. The preparations for their encounter are also mirrored, as we first see Irene in her dressing room looking for the appropriate outfit for her meeting with Sherlock with the shot then moving to 221b Baker Street, where he is preparing for their meeting as well. They are both preparing for a battle, as Sherlock Holmes tells John that he is looking for his armour, whereas Irene tells her assistant that she will be wearing her battledress. There is a strong contrast in their disguises; Sherlock chooses to disguise himself as a wounded helpless priest signifying celibacy, while Irene Adler’s so-called “battledress” consists of her naked body, only embellished with diamond earrings and black patent leather Louboutin high-heels, strongly symbolizing sexuality. Being aware of Sherlock’s presumed asexuality, Irene Adler’s tactic consists of shocking and destabilizing Sherlock Holmes, which is one of the reasons why she chose to appear naked at their meeting. To further unsettle Sherlock Holmes she tells him “[l]ook at those cheekbones! I could cut myself slapping that face. Would you like me to try?” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:24:32-00:24:40). In this way she establishes her sexuality as her main characteristic opposed to Sherlock’s sexual inexperience. Sherlock is confused which is demonstrated by his inability to gather any information about Irene based on her appearance which is exemplified by the question marks which appear whenever he tries to analyse her. This inability is further evidenced by Sherlock’s immediate deductions such as “[t]wo day shirt, electric not blade, date tonight, hasn’t phoned sister, new toothbrush, night out with Stamford” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:25:16-00:25:26), about John Watson after only a glance at him.
90 The focus on Irene Adler’s body is a common theme throughout the entire episode. Her nudity was not only a shock factor for the audience and Sherlock Holmes, but it poses a challenge to Sherlock as well. When he detects the location of her safe containing what he presumes are the compromising photos, he finds the location only after Irene had told him that she had already given him all the information necessary, as her body measurement corresponds to the code of her safe. A further instance that evidences the exclusive focus on Irene’s female body occurs when Irene Adler is presumed dead and Sherlock Holmes goes to the morgue to identify the body. He immediately suggests that it is indeed Irene’s corpse even though her face is badly disfigured. He only recognizes her because he knows her body measurements and in this scene the focus on the body is especially highlighted; her face, like in the first two scenes, is not visible to the audience, only her body is. According to Kirchknopf, further evidence of the significance of Irene’s body are conveyed in her online nickname which is “the whiphand”, the photographs posted on her website “The Woman” displaying her naked or almost naked body, as well as the orgasmic moan which she sets as a text alert on Sherlock’s phone (53). Irene does not only destabilize Sherlock Holmes with her nudity, but impresses him with her deduction skills as well, as he looks at her puzzled and she states “[d]o you know the big problem with a disguise, Mr Holmes? However hard you try, it’s always a self-portrait” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 00:25:31- 00:25:38). Therefore, she consciously chose her nudity as a disguise knowing that it would derail Sherlock’s usual methods of deduction and analysis, which is confirmed by Kirchknopf, as she states that “[s]he fully succeeds with this first move, as Sherlock cannot unravel her secret with his usual scanning methods, either just because he usually deciphers people based on clothing and accessories or because he is to a certain extent influenced by her sex appeal” (153). While the BBC’s Irene Adler consciously chose to expose her female body as a disguise, in Conan Doyle’s version she assumes the appearance of a man. Katherine McCain argues in her chapter “’Feeling Exposed?’ Irene Adler and the Self-Reflective Disguise” that Irene Adler’s disguise as a man foreshadows and signifies her “male qualities”, which then allow her to outwit Sherlock Holmes (90). From a certain standpoint, Irene’s intellectual skills are only displayed when her body is not fully exposed. Irene Adler makes her deductions only after she has
91 put on Sherlock’s signature coat, which implies that Sherlock Holmes embodies intelligence and wit, and only when Irene’s body is covered, the focus on her body momentarily shifts to her own intellectual capacities, as she tries to solve the case of the hitchhiker. Yet, although her intellectual skills are notable, they are contrasted by an impatient Sherlock Holmes who only needed a short video call to solve the case. Therefore, while Irene’s detective skills are considerable, they are in no way comparable to Sherlock’s deductions and intellectual capacities. In fact, McCain argues that “Irene literally becomes more logical when dressed in his [Sherlock’s] things” (93). As soon as Irene puts on Sherlock’s coat she is able to make deductions about the case, whereas prior to wearing Sherlock’s clothes she was not able to come up with any theories about the hitchhiker’s cause of death. McCain argues that in the first sequence of the scene, when Irene is still naked, she requests Sherlock’s explanation of the case, whereas in the second sequence, when Irene Adler is covered in Sherlock’s coat she is able to solve the case on her own (93-94). A similar situation occurs when Irene Adler visits 221b Baker Street. In this scene she is wearing Sherlock’s dressing gown, which according to McCain, Sherlock always wears when he needs to think. Wearing his attire allows her to successfully trick Sherlock into deciphering the code for her (94). Therefore, McCain argues that “these successes are not actually products of Irene herself but are rather the work of her ‘disguises’, his clothes” (94). Based on McCain’s argument, it can be argued that Irene Adler is only able to achieve her goals when her body is covered in Sherlock’s clothing, confirming that the exclusive focus on her body diminishes
Irene’s agency and capacities compared to her original counterpart. Further evidence of her inferior intellectual skills compared to those of the male characters is found in one of Irene Adler’s own statements. In the scene shot on the airplane filled with dead bodies, she tells Sherlock and Mycroft that she had had the valuable information for a long time, but did not know how to use it. Therefore, had it not been for the help of the criminal consultant James Moriarty, she probably would not have known how to blackmail the Royal family or sell the decoded information to the terrorists. Hence, once again her agency and intellectual skills are actually traced back to a man’s agency and intellect. Irene Adler’s smokescreen-agency relates to the dichotomy brain-arm, where men like Sherlock and Moriarty are the brain and Irene Adler is the arm merely performing the actions the men ordered her to and consequently diminishes her character to solely her
92 body. Based on this conclusion it can be argued that Sherlock’s Irene Adler can be considered a postfeminist femme fatale. In her chapter “’Of dubious and questionable memory’ The Collison of Gender and Canon in Creating Sherlock’s Postfeminist Femme Fatale” Maria Alberto argues that the BBC’s portrayal of Irene Adler fits exactly into the role that she describes as postfeminist femme fatale. Alberto’s description of the postfeminist femme fatale conveys that the female characters representative of this new archetype “access the openly commercial sexuality of the femme fatale, but through her the illusion of power is rather different because sexuality has become simply the gateway to a much larger and arguably more worrisome transaction – the suggestion of agency in exchange for any place in the narrative at all” (68). There is certainly truth to Alberto’s statement in that Irene Adler’s agency is only an illusion, because, as is demonstrated in the airplane scene, Irene Adler only acts on James Moriarty’s commands. Thus, she was not the mastermind behind the plans to destroy the Holmes brothers, but only a puppet in Moriarty’s scheme, which would imply firstly that her agency is built on the agency of male characters, and secondly that Irene Adler could not be considered a real character but a mere plot device instead, furthering the feud between Sherlock Holmes and James Moriarty. The writers of Sherlock consistently maintained the focus on Irene’s body until the end, and therefore it is exactly that - her body, which she considers her weapon - that causes her downfall. It is due to her body’s reactions that Sherlock is able to unlock Irene Adler’s phone.
SHERLOCK: … I took your pulse: elevated; your pupils: dilated. I imagine John Watson thinks love's a mystery to me, but the chemistry is incredibly simple and very destructive. When we first met, you told me that disguise is always a self-portrait; how true of you. The combination to your safe: your measurements - but this… this is far more intimate. This is your heart, and you should never let it rule your head. (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 01:20:35-01:21:15)
As a consequence of her elevated pulse and her dilated pupils, Sherlock is able to the detect an infatuation on Irene Adler’s part, as these are common symptoms of a person’s attraction towards another. Therefore, he is able to deduce that her heart is the key to decrypt the code on Irene’s phone. The writers of the show highlighted
93 Irene’s infatuation by including Sherlock’s name in Irene’s code, which ends up being “I am SHERlocked” (“A Scandal in Belgravia” Sherlock 01:21:47). While in the first scenes Irene Adler has total control over her body and she is completely aware of how to use it as a means of extracting information or to confuse Sherlock Holmes, it is exactly her body that betrays her in the end. This implies that this body- exclusivity does not signify agency or female empowerment and control. In fact, after realizing that she has lost, she begs for Sherlock’s mercy with tears in her eyes and argues that she would only last a few months without her phone’s protection. Irene’s begging for mercy, as well as her admitting to utter powerlessness and helplessness, indicate that she actually never had any power or agency at all. The last scene is arguably most representative of her lack of agency, as Irene Adler is depicted on her knees wearing a jihab awaiting her execution by beheading. This scene is the most relevant for several reasons: firstly, Irene’s entire body is covered, wearing a jihab, which Primoarc argues symbolizes the oppression of the female body (43). Secondly, the beheading could imply that Irene Adler is reduced to only her body, as the head is where the brain is located, and that part is supposed to be severed from the rest of her body. Lastly, her supposed executioner turns out to be Sherlock Holmes who is on a mission to save this damsel-in-distress-version of Irene Adler. Hence, this Irene Adler is not only unable to beat Sherlock Holmes, but she needs to be saved by him as well. It can be argued that because of Sherlock’s exclusive focus on Irene Adler’s body and her lack of agency, the series has been heavily criticized. In fact, In her chapter “’A Scandal in Bohemia’ to ‘Clowns’: The Decreasing Power of Irene Adler in TV Adaptations of Sherlock Holmes” Andrea Kirchknopf claims that the main ground for criticism in Sherlock’s portrayal of Irene Adler is the reinforcement of Victorian female stereotypes such as the Angel in the House and the femme fatale, characterized almost exclusively by sexuality, instead of questioning or subverting these outdated female stereotypes, which she argues would be necessary for a 21st century adaptation (149). According to Kirchknopf, “Irene Adler especially sticks out among these conventional depictions, since it does more harm than solely confirming nineteenth-century clichés: it even reverses the feminist subtext of Doyle’s original figure” (149). In fact, Jane Clare Jones also argues in her article “Is Sherlock sexist? Steven Moffat’s wanton women” published in The Guardian, that “you’ve got to worry when a woman comes off worse in 2012 than in 1891” (Jones).
94 Jones’ statement has truth to it, as one would assume that given the possibilities the 21st century offers to women, a woman’s agency would increase or at least be the same as the ones of a character of the Victorian period. Hence, whereas Conan Doyle’s Irene Adler could be considered a proto-feminist with the “face of the most beautiful of women” (Conan Doyle 166), “a soul of steel” (Conan Doyle 166) and the “mind of the most resolute of men” (Conan Doyle 166) while simultaneously displaying elements of femininity, Sherlock’s Irene regressed, especially when considering the 21st century setting where the focus shifted from a balance of brain and body of the original Irene Adler to an exclusive focus on Irene Adler’s sexuality, femininity, and her female body. Therefore, the TV series Sherlock can be considered a missed opportunity to depict powerful and proactive women.
95 6. Conclusion
The aim of this thesis was to explore the agency of female characters in Conan Doyle’s original version of the Sherlock Holmes stories, in Michelle Birkby’s The House at Baker Street, and the BBC TV series Sherlock. The results of the analyses demonstrate that in these selected works in question, the agency of the female characters differs to varying degrees. The theoretical chapter examines the origins as well as the development of female detective fiction. One pattern that stands out is the woman’s choice between a fulfilling personal life and a professional career. Female detectives until the Golden Age almost always decided to renounce their investigating in favour of marriage. The Golden Age defines a turning point for female detective fiction, as most women detectives were elderly busy-bodies, e.g. Miss Marple and Miss Silver, and therefore the writers eliminated the dilemma between marriage and career. This concept was further explored in the hard-boiled tradition, which depicted mostly single women with no apparent love interest. From the 1970s onwards, female detective fiction became a tool for social criticism exposing the issues women had to face because of their gender. In Conan Doyle’s stories most women display a very limited agency. A plausible reason for this is the strict and oppressive Victorian morals and laws concerning the position of women. Due to the fact that during the Victorian period women were considered intellectually inferior to men, it was men who functioned within the public sphere, and were therefore in the position of deciding over the women’s finances. Women should not concern themselves with problems regarding finances or politics, but should limit their aspirations to becoming domestic goddesses, the so-called Angel-in-the-House, and to emanating purity, propriety and modesty instead. However, with the enactment of the Married Women’s Property Act women obtained the right to decide over their own money. While Conan Doyle could have explored the dynamic between fathers, husbands and women, with women in position of taking control over their lives at least regarding finances, he chose to display the issues women had to face prior to acceptance of the Married Women’s Property Act by society as is exemplified in “A Case of Identity” and “The Adventure of the Speckled Band”. Conan Doyle’s depiction of these seemingly weak women implies that although by law women were allowed to decide for themselves
96 how to manage their finances, the patriarchal system as well as the women’s submission were so deeply rooted in these women’s minds that they were not immediately able to adapt to their new gained independence. The analysis of Conan Doyle’s work also exhibits some women’s reaction to the oppression by the Victorian patriarchal system, as women such as Kitty Winter and Sophy Kratides were not willing to accept their fates as wronged women or victims, and thus took matters into their own hands and got revenge. The refusal of accepting victimization can also be detected in The Sign of Four in which Mary Morstan instead of putting her faith in the hands of a suitor, hired the best detective to get to the bottom of the pearl-ordeal. The woman with the most agency is the woman – Irene Adler. Considered by many to a be proto-feminist, Irene Adler does not conform to Victorian standards, nor is she willing to bend to the will of anyone but her own. She is a smart, modern, independent woman and, most importantly, the only woman to have ever beaten Sherlock Holmes. Irene Adler is able to live by her own morals, and thus, demonstrates that it is not a woman’s duty to fulfil society’s expectations. Consequently, Conan Doyle, based on his portrayal of women, denounces the oppressive patriarchal system of the Victorian period on the one hand, and on the other, promotes the idea of independent women. This idea of advocating for independent and proactive women has also been taken up by Michelle Birkby in her revisionist novel The House at Baker Street. The protagonists of Birkby’s novel are not Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson - as one might expect - but rather Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson instead. By giving Mrs Hudson the narrating voice, the characters, as well as the setting assume a new meaning. In fact, Mrs Hudson’s kitchen which is never featured in Conan Doyle’s version becomes a symbol of the women’s development. At first the kitchen represents the domestic sphere, a safe space, Mrs Hudson’s comfort zone. However, the trail of clues and the longing for adventure lead them to transgress the boundaries of the kitchen. Whenever the women leave the safety of 221b Baker Street they take a further step into their transformation from passive into active characters. Further aspects that Birkby explores in The House at Baker Street are the empowerment through female friendship, as well as the compassion for women as a driving force. On their own, Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson, would have probably never taken on a case. However, they are aware of their special bond and that together there is nearly nothing that they are not capable of accomplishing, not
97 even taking down the cruellest blackmailer. Nonetheless, Mrs Hudson’s and Mary Watson’s development is constantly accompanied by self-doubt. However, these women are able to gain strength from one another whenever they feel overwhelmed by the implications of the case, and whenever they waver whether they should tell Mr Holmes and Dr Watson about the blackmailer, fearing that they will not be able to live up to their clients’ expectations. In the end they never do, not only because they want to explore their full potential, but also because their compassion for these victimized women functions as a driving force. Throughout the novel they often remind themselves why they are investigating, finding strength and confidence in the thought that they are helping many women, avenging those for whom it is already too late, and preventing others from suffering the same fate. Birkby criticizes the misogynistic ways of the Victorian period, as the opportunity for Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson to investigate only arises after Holmes dismissed Laura Shirley, considering her problems petty and trivial. The epitome of misogyny is the blackmailer who blackmails women simply because he gains pleasure from destroying their lives, watching these women’s happy existences slowly disintegrate. Birkby’s stance on misogyny is clear as the characters displaying misogynistic traits either die or admit to their mistakes in the end. Holmes is surprised and amazed by what Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson were able to achieve, and he acknowledges that his misperception of women has led to so many crimes having gone unpunished, and so many victimized women remain still unavenged. Birkby’s preach for equality cannot only be detected in the depiction of misogynist characters, but also in her portrayal of marriage. Marriages based on equality of the two parties, e.g. the marriage of Mary Morstan and Dr Watson as well as between Irene Adler and Godfrey Norton, are blissful, as they are built on mutual trust, love and respect. In contrast, marriages that display a hierarchy – with men on top and women on the bottom – are doomed to fail, as is depicted in the tragedy that was the marriage of the Whitechapel Lady. While Birkby endorses female agency and independence the same cannot be argued for the BBC’s Sherlock. This TV series could be considered a missed opportunity to do right by women for once. Although the update of the setting to the 21st century would allow drastic improvements to the agency of female characters, the writers of the series took a conservative approach when it comes to the female characters. The writers’ sexist attitude is especially detectable in characters such
98 as Sally Donovan, Lady Smallwood and Irene Adler. Irene Adler, at first, appears to have a high agency as she displays female empowerment through the control over her body. Most of the scenes starring Irene Adler are characterized by her body, e.g. her nudity in the encounter with Sherlock Holmes, the measurements of her body which correspond to the code of the safe, the corpse in Molly’s morgue etc. Yet, the heavily body-focused Irene Adler turns out to be just that, a body. Although, for most of the episode she is able to deceive Sherlock Holmes into thinking that she is a worthy adversary, but as the episode ends, the audience discovers that she was only a puppet in Moriarty’s grand scheme. Thus, her agency turns out to have been a smokescreen all along. While the writers missed the mark with Irene Adler’s depiction, decreasing her agency to the one of her original counterpart, they were able to integrate several noteworthy female characters such as Mrs Hudson, Mary Watson and, most importantly, Molly Hooper. Mrs Hudson was assigned a more prominent role compared to Doyle’s version. She functions as a motherly figure to the boys, and therefore is able to manipulate them and make them bend to her will. She is, indeed, a woman full of surprises with an interesting past. With this portrayal the writers made Mrs Hudson more multi-dimensional and complex. Since the series is set in the 21st century the professionalization of women plays a vital role. This is exemplified in the portrayal of Mary Watson and Molly Hooper. While the world of science was dominated by men, and in some ways still is, including a female pathologist in the series was a smart move on the writers’ part. With Molly Hooper’s depiction the writers were able to demonstrate a balance between a personal life and a professional career. Sherlock Holmes appreciates Molly Hooper for both her professional advice, as well as her sensitivity and kindness motivating him to become a better man. Mary Watson also performs jobs which would have been unthinkable in the Victorian period, ranging from CIA spy to assassin for hire. However, she retires from her former eventful and adventurous life to settle down for marriage and motherhood conforming to the trend of female detective fiction at the turn of the 20th century. In conclusion it can be said that Conan Doyle promotes female independence in his stories, Birkby explores the full potential of Mrs Hudson and Mary Watson, whereas Sherlock’s portrayal of women is conservative given the possibilities the setting would offer.
99 7. Teaching Sherlock Holmes in the EFL-Classroom
The Sherlock Holmes stories are a wide known phenomenon, and are therefore often taught at school. The focus of the lessons is mostly on Sherlock Holmes himself, his friendship with Dr Watson, or his method of deduction. By contrast, the women of the Sherlock Holmes canon, apart from Irene Adler, seem to go unnoticed. Hence, the goal is to design a lesson plan which comprises four or five units (depending on the time the students will need to complete the tasks) dedicated to one particular woman, namely Mary Sutherland.
7.1. The Importance of Teaching Literature in EFL-Classrooms
Teaching literature in an EFL-classroom can be challenging, as understanding literary texts can be demanding for students. However, literary texts do not only offer interesting stories, but also serve as a tool to improve the students’ linguistic skills. In fact, in his book Literature and Language Learning in the EFL Classroom, Masayuki Teranishi argues that “EFL students can learn linguistic features while pursuing the literary interpretation of the authentic work by connecting language features with social, cultural and historical contexts which contributed to the production of that particular work” (170). Minoo Alemi sums up the advantages of teaching literature in an EFL-classroom arguing that literary texts improve the students’ linguistic skills as the language used in literary texts is more colourful and diverse than the language usually used in textbooks (178). Authentic materials, as well as the multiple interpretations a literary text offers help, according to Alemi, to further the students’ personal growth (178). The curriculum established by the Ministry for education in Austria also indicates literature as a means for personal growth declaring that “[i]m Sinne einer humanistisch orientierten Allgemeinbildung ist bei der thematischen Auswahl fremdsprachiger Texte auch literarischen Werken ein entsprechender Stellenwert einzuräumen“ (4). Literary texts are also a means to experience and acquire knowledge about different cultures. In fact, Alemi argues that the inclusion of literary material in an EFL-classroom expands the students’ views on different cultures, describing literature as a “doorway into another culture,
100 giving students the opportunity to eventually understand and appreciate cultures and ideologies different from their own” (178). Geoff Hall, Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at the University of Nottingham in Ningbo, agrees with these claims arguing in his chapter “Recent Developments in Uses of Literature in Language Teaching” that literary texts function as useful tools to teach students about different cultures (19). In fact, the Austrian curriculum states that in the EFL-classroom not only the specific language should be taught, but intercultural competence as well, “[d]urch interkulturelle Themenstellung ist die Sensibilisierung der Schülerinnen und Schüler für die Sprachenvielfalt Europas und der Welt zu verstärken, Aufgeschlossenheit gegenüber Nachbarsprachen... zu fördern und insgesamt das Verständnis für andere Kulturen und Lebensweisen zu vertiefen” (BMBWF 1). Literature from different cultures is a means to teach intercultural competence. The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) encourages teachers to teach literature in the EFL-classroom, arguing that “[l]iterary studies serve many more educational purposes – intellectual, moral, and emotional, linguistic and cultural – than the purely aesthetic” (56). Based on the advantages mentioned by Alemi and Teranishi, as well as the incentive of teaching literature in the EFL-classroom promoted in the Austrian curriculum and the CEFR, although challenging for both the teacher and the students, the use of literary texts should be implemented in the EFL-classroom since it allows students to learn a foreign language from a non-strictly-grammatical perspective, and at the same time provides insight into the traditions and mind-sets of different cultures.
7.3. Didactic Approach and Class Description
The proposed lessons are planned for an eight-grade class AHS. Therefore, the students are 17 or 18 years old. The ideal class for this lesson plan would consist of an equal number of boys and girls, which would enable a discussion about the topic of gender roles with participants representative of both gender. The Austrian curriculum invites teachers to incorporate the different skills in their lessons:
101 Gleiche Gewichtung der Fertigkeitsbereiche: Die Fertigkeitsbereiche Hören, Lesen, an Gesprächen teilnehmen, zusammenhängendes Sprechen, Schreiben sind mit gleicher Gewichtung, regelmäßig und möglichst integrativ zu üben. Auf Praxisrelevanz sowie steigende Authentizität der Sprachmittel und Sprachsituationen ist dabei besonders zu achten (BMBWF 2)
Therefore, the proposed lesson plan will include discussions in plenum, a listening task, the reading of a literary text, as well as a writing task, in order for the four skills to be integrated equally within these teaching units. The Austrian curriculum also states that 8th grade students should have reached the B2 level in the four skills (listening, speaking, reading, writing) in their first foreign language (BMBWF 6), In terms of the descriptive scales of the CEFR the B2/B2+ level corresponds to
Listening to Audio Media and Recordings: Can understand recordings in standard dialect likely to be encountered in social, professional or academic life and identify speaker viewpoints and attitudes as well as the information content. Creative Writing: Can write clear, detailed descriptions of real or imaginary events and experiences, marking the relationship between ideas in clear connected text, and following established conventions of the genre concerned. Overall Reading Comprehension: Can read with a large degree of independence, adapting style and speed of reading to different texts and purposes, and using appropriate reference sources selectively. Overall Oral Production: Can give clear, systematically developed descriptions and presentations, with appropriate highlighting of significant points, and relevant supporting detail (CEFR 68, 62, 69, 58)
The different tasks of the proposed lessons will take into account and be formed according to these descriptions of the required skills.
102 7.4. Description and Analysis of the Proposed Lessons
PRE-READING ACTIVITES:
Tasks (1) and (2) – Activating Knowledge
Although the students should already have reached a B2 level and therefore should be able to read the Sherlock Holmes stories in its context, they should slowly tap into the topic. That is the reason why starting broadly is the most useful and meaningful approach. Hence, the lesson will start with activating their pre- knowledge about feminism. For the purpose of this lesson plan, only general facts about feminism will be sufficient, as the focus on these teaching units will be on the depiction of women. In order to activate the students’ pre-knowledge, the lesson starts with a brainstorming on feminist milestones and accomplishments. This task is based on the think-pair-share method. This method consists of three parts: firstly, students brainstorm on a specific topic individually for one or two minutes. The next step is to exchange their ideas with a partner which will also take two to three minutes. The final step is to share their ideas with the entire class. This method helps to gather ideas and input from the whole class. By dividing this process into different steps, the students have time to gather their ideas and to put them in order as well. In this task the students are expected to come up with the most noteworthy accomplishments such as the right to vote, the right to education etc. A timeline will then be drawn on the blackboard and labelled feminist milestones where accomplishments and their corresponding dates can be visually displayed. This timeline, on which the events will be depicted in chronological order, will function as a visual aid for the students. Furthermore, the time span that will be relevant for the next tasks will be highlighted in colour, namely the late 19th century. The milestones that have occurred after the Victorian period will function as a guideline for the students to take into consideration when they will re-write Conan Doyle’s short story. The handout for tasks (1) and (2) is called “Milestones of Feminism”.
103 Task (3) Creating a Context to Conan Doyle’s “A Case of Identity”
Since the focus of this lesson plan is on Conan Doyle’s female character Mary Sutherland it is important for the students to understand properly the role of the woman in the Victorian Era, the woman’s position in society, and the issues women had to face during this period. Therefore, the students will receive additional information regarding this topic in form of a short video. The video chosen is “Women in Victorian England” (Kopyra 00:00-05:45), which deals with the education of women, their working conditions, their role in the household, as well as female sexuality, women’s morals, fashion, and the path to the right to vote for women. This video will help the students to form a better understanding of the situation of women in this particular time period. The context to Conan Doyle’s “A Case of Identity” will be created by means of a listening task (handout “Women in the Victorian Period”). Listening tasks can vary in form and the reason for choosing the short answers format is due to the speaking pace. In this way the students only have to listen for specific information. Each question relates to one topic as the video is subdivided into different parts. Students know in which part of the video they can find the information needed to answer the question.
Task (4) Secure Information of the Listening Task
The listening task will be followed by a discussion in plenum in order to secure the knowledge acquired through the video. The CEFR states that in informal discussions students on a B2 level “[c]an take an active part in informal discussion in familiar contexts, commenting, putting point of view clearly, evaluating alternative proposals and making and responding to hypotheses” (77) and “[c]an account for and sustain his/her opinions in discussion by providing relevant explanations, arguments and comments” (77). Before starting the discussion, the listening task will be summarized together in class. The main points will be written on the blackboard for the students to copy in their notebooks, as the information given in the video will be essential for the reading task as well as for the writing one. Thus, questions will be posed such as: • What is the British Elementary Education Act? • What were the women’s main duties in the Victorian period?
104 • How should a woman behave in the Victorian period? • What was their position within the unit of marriage? • What is the Married Women’s Property Act? • Etc. • After having discussed the main points of the video, the discussion will shift to the students’ personal opinions about the information given in the video. Thus, the questions posed to the students will be along the lines of:
• What do you think of the position of women in the Victorian period? • Do you think the treatment of women during this period was fair/unfair? Why? • Were there advantages / disadvantages of being a woman in the 19th century? • Do you think it was the right decision to pass the Elementary Education Act? • If you had been a woman in the Victorian period, what would you have wished to change? • Do you think some of the values of the Victorian period should be re-instated in today’s society? • Do you think Victorian values / standards could also work in today’s society? • Etc.
WHILE-READING ACTIVITIES
Task (5) Reading Conan Doyle’s “A Case of Identity”
Since Conan Doyle’s short story “A Case of Identity” is about ten pages long it will not be possible to read the entire story together in class. Students are required to give particular attention to the passages in the text that refer to Mary Sutherland’s position, problems and her role as woman and highlight them. Thus, their reading will be a combination of reading for gist or orientation as well as reading for specific information. In fact, the CEFR describes the students’ ability to read for orientation on a B2 level as “[c]an scan quickly through long and complex texts, locating
105 relevant details. Can quickly identify the content and relevance of news items, articles and reports on a wide range of professional topics, deciding whether closer study is worthwhile” (70), whereas for reading for specific information, the CEFR states that “[c]an obtain information, ideas and opinions from highly specialised sources within his/her field. Can understand specialised articles outside his/her field, provided he/she can use a dictionary occasionally to confirm his/her interpretation of terminology” (70). Due to the length of the text as well as the limited time in class, only parts of the short story will be read in class, whereas others will be given as homework. The text will be read out loud in class by students in turn. After every paragraph, the paragraph in question will be summarized by a student, unknown vocabulary will be explained and questions will be answered. This format will be used throughout the reading in class. This way it can be ensured that the students have fully understood the text. However, to further ensure that students have fully understood the parts of the text given as homework, at the beginning of the lesson the parts in question will also be summarized. Students need to write down questions about the text as well as unknown vocabulary which will be explained in class.
POST-READING ACTIVITIES
Task (6) Discussion of “A Case of Identity”
The reading will be followed by a discussion in class. The first part of the discussion will be characterized by a series of questions about the text, for instance:
• Why does Mary Sutherland seek Sherlock Holmes’ help? • Why does Mary’s stepfather pretend to be someone else? • How are Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson able to unmask the stepfather’s disguise? • Etc.
Then, the discussion will be about the students’ perceptions and impressions. In this part they will express their opinion on Conan Doyle’s short story as well as make
106 suggestions about possible changes to the text. To encourage students to speak their minds further questions will be posed:
• How would you describe the portrayal of women in Conan Doyle’s short story? • How would you describe the portrayal of men in “A Case of Identity”? • Keeping in mind what we have learnt about the women in the Victorian period, do you think Conan Doyle’s portrayal of Mary Sutherland is accurate? • What was, in your opinion, the motivating force behind the stepfather’s actions? • Do you think the stepfather’s actions are justifiable? • What would you have done if you were in Mary Sutherland’s position? • What would you change about Mary Sutherland? • What would you have done if you were in the stepfather’s position? • Etc.
The post-reading discussion will help students to digest the information given in the text as well as express their opinion, criticize Conan Doyle’s work and prepare them for the writing task.
Task (7) Wiring Task
The final task of this lesson plan is a writing task (handout “Re-Writing ‘A Case of Identity’”). The students will have the opportunity to choose between two tasks. Either a re-writing of Conan Doyle’s short story in the present time, or a re-writing of the short story from Mary Sutherland’s perspective. The short stories will be written in groups of three, hence, students do not have to write the entire short story by themselves, and can help each other out instead. Moreover, group work promotes constructive interaction and creative input as students will have to listen to the different opinions and suggestions of the other members of the group, make decisions, make compromises, and divide the workload equally among the members of the group. As for the length of the short story, it should be between two
107 to three pages, which when divided among the three members of the group corresponds to about one page per student. The focus of the two writing tasks will be on the modern setting or on Mary Sutherland’s perspective. Therefore, it will not be taken into consideration, if the students do not follow the formula on how to write a detective story. In order to make the task seem more authentic, two tweets referring to the change of setting and to the change of perspective were created. These tweets serve to create a context for the students as they will take on the task to write a better version, and in this way also fulfilling JimmYx07’s and SherlockGirl98’s wishes this way.
108 7.4. Teaching Materials / Handouts
Milestones of Feminism
2 (a) Can you think of any milestones feminists have reached in the last two centuries? What did feminists accomplish in regards to marriage, property etc.?
(b) Please add the feminist milestones (with the year in which they were reached) in the timeline below.
2Currier & Ives https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/arts/design/rebel-women-museum-of- the-city-of-new-york.html
109 Women in the Victorian Period
You are going watch a video about women in the Victorian period3. You will watch the video twice. While listening, answer the questions (1-7) in a maximum of FOUR words. There is one example (0) at the beginning.
4
(0) What was a woman’s main goal? Get married (1) What act was enacted in 1870? (2) What were typical professions of women in the Victorian Era? Name at least 3! (3) How was the wife, the so-called Angel-in-the House, supposed to be?
(4) When was the Married Women’s Property Act enacted? (5) Which style element remained popular throughout the entire Victorian period? (6) What was the main quality a woman should have? (7) When did women get the right to attend University and the right to vote? Write down the two dates!
3 Kopyra https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYHsYBa-tGQ 4 Women’s Fashion of the Late Victorian https://fiveminutehistory.com/fashions-of-the-late- victorian-era/
110 Re-Writing “A Case of Identity”
Read through these two tweets
JimmYx07 5 The BBC adaptation of “A Case of Identity” was the worst. Definitely didn’t do justice to Doyle’s original. Can someone please write something better?!?
SherlockGIrl98 6 Why doesn’t anybody care about Mary Sutherland? Did anyone ever bother to wonder how she felt about the whole ordeal?!? Don’t think so….
You can choose between two options: • What would happen if the characters of “A Case of Identity” lived in 2020? Re-write in groups of three Conan Doyle’s short story in the present day. Take into consideration how the position of women has changed from the Victorian period to today. • Mary Sutherland’s woes Re-write in groups of three Conan Doyle’s short story “A Case of Identity” from Mary Sutherland’s perspective. Take into consideration Mary’s possible emotions, fears, and shock when she discovers her stepfather’s scheme. In your eyes, what would she do? Write about 800-1100 words.
5 Rehak https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/10/magazine/who-made-that-twitter-bird.html 6 Rehak https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/10/magazine/who-made-that-twitter-bird.html
111 8. Works Cited
8.1. Primary Sources
“A Study in Pink.” Sherlock, created by Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performance by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, season 1, episode 1, BBC Wales / Hartswoods Films / WGBH, 2010. Netflix, https://www.netflix.com/watch/70174779?trackId=200257859 (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
“A Scandal in Belgravia.” Sherlock, created by Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performance by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, season 2, episode 1, BBC Wales / Hartswoods Films / WGBH, 2011. Netflix, https://www.netflix.com/watch/70229981?trackId=200257859 (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
Birkby, Michelle. The House at Baker Street: Behind Every Great Detective Stands a Great Woman… . Pan Books, 2016.
Conan Doyle, Arthur. The Penguin Complete Sherlock Holmes. Penguin Books, 1985.
“His Last Vow.” Sherlock, created by Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performance by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, season 3, episode 3, BBC Wales / Hartswoods Films / WGBH, 2014. Netflix, https://www.netflix.com/watch/70297467?trackId=200257859 (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
“The Empty Hearse.” Sherlock, created by Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performance by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, season 3, episode 1, BBC Wales / Hartswoods Films / WGBH, 2014. Netflix, https://www.netflix.com/watch/70297465?trackId=200257859 (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
112 “The Lying Detective.” Sherlock, created by Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performance by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, season 4, episode 2, BBC Wales / Hartswoods Films / WGBH, 2017. Netflix, https://www.netflix.com/watch/80082999?trackId=200257859 (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
“The Six Thatchers.” Sherlock, created by Stephen Moffat and Mark Gatiss, performance by Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman, season 4, episode 1, BBC Wales / Hartswoods Films / WGBH, 2017. Netflix, https://www.netflix.com/watch/80082998?trackId=200257859 (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
8.2. Secondary Sources
Abel, Elizabeth, et., editors. The Voyage in: Fictions of Female Development. UP of New England, 1983.
Alberto, Maria. “’Of dubious and questionable memory’: The Collision of Gender and Canon in Creating Sherlock’s Postfeminist Femme Fatale.” Gender and the Modern Sherlock Holmes: Essays on Film and Television Adaptations Since 2009, edited by Nadine Farghaly, McFarland, 2015, pp. 66-84.
Alemi, Minoo. “The Use of Literary Works in an EFL-Class.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, 2011, pp. 177-180, doi:10.4304/tpls.1.2.177-180.
Aviram, Hadar. “Dainty Hands: Perceptions of Women and Crime in Sherlock Holmes Stories.” Hastings Women’s Law Journal, vol. 22, no. 2, 2011, pp. 233- 256.
Baeston, Margaret. 1895. Professional Women Upon Their Professions: Conversations. Cambridge UP, 2012.
113 Beyer, Charlotte. “’I Too Mourn the Loss’: Mrs Hudson and the Absence of Sherlock Holmes.” Sherlock Holmes in Context, edited by Sam Naidu, Palgrave Macmillan, 2017, pp. 61-81.
Birkby, Michelle. “The female villains in Sherlock Holmes were ahead of their time.” Inews, 17 Feb. 2017, https://inews.co.uk/culture/books/female-villains-sherlock- holmes-ahead-time-529064 (Accessed on 9 March 2020).
---. “Mary Morstan: The Victim who Refuses.” Villains, Victims and Violets: Agency and Feminism in the Original Sherlock Holmes Canon, edited by Resa Haile and Tamara R. Bower, Brown Walker Press, 2019, pp. 35-43.
Bloom, Clive, editor. Twentieth-Century Suspense: The Thriller Comes of Age. McFarland, 1990.
Bourke, Joanna. “Sexual Violence, Marital Guidance, and Victorian Bodies: an Aeshesiology.” Victorian Studies, vol. 50, no. 3, 2008, pp. 419-436. JSTOR, doi:10.2979/vic.2008.50.3.419.
Bull, Sofia. “From Crime Lab to Mind Palace: Post-CSI Forensics In Sherlock.” New Review of Film and Television Studies, vol. 14, no. 3, 2016, pp. 324–344. Taylor and Francis Online, doi:10.1080/17400309.2016.1187890.
Bundesministerium Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung. Lehrplan für Lebende Fremdsprache (Erste, Zweite), 2006, https://www.uibk.ac.at/srp/PDFs/lebendefremdsprache_ost_neu0.pdf (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Buzwell, Greg. “Daughters of decadence: the New Woman in the Victorian fin de siècle.” British Library, 15 May 2014, https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and- victorians/articles/daughters-of-decadence-the-new-woman-in-the-victorian-fin- de-siecle (Accessed on 9 March 2020).
Caine, Barbara. English Feminism, 1780-1980. Oxford UP, 2004.
114 Carlson, Ashley L, editor. Women in STEM on Television: Critical Essays. McFarland, 2018.
Cirile, Marie. Detective Marie Cirile: Memoirs of a Police Officer. Doubleday, 1975.
Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge UP, 2001.
Craig, Patricia and Mary Cadogan. The Lady Investigates: Women Detectives and Spies in Fiction. Oxford UP, 1986.
Cranny-Francis, Anne. “Gender and Genre: Feminist Rewritings of Detective Fiction.” Womens Studies International Forum, vol. 11, no. 1, 1988, pp. 69–84. Researchgate, doi:10.1016/0277-5395(88)90008-8.
Cunningham, Gail. The New Woman and the Victorian Novel. Palgrave Macmillan, 1978.
Danielová, Klára. Victorian Women and Their Representation in Selected Sherlock Holmes Stories. 2009. Masaryk University, thesis.
Delany, Vicki. “Unable to Save Herself: An Examination of Women as Persons in Three Stories of the Sherlock Holmes Canon.” Villains, Victims and Violets: Agency and Feminism in the Original Sherlock Holmes Canon, edited by Resa Haile et al., Brown Walker Press, 2019, pp. 3-13.
Digby, Anne. “Victorian Values and Women in Public and Private.” Proceedings of the British Academy, no. 78, 1990, pp. 195-215.
Farghaly, Nadine, editor. Gender and the Modern Sherlock Holmes: Essays on Film and Television Adaptations Since 2009. McFarland, 2015.
115 Fleischhack, Maria, editor. Celebrating the Women in the Sherlock Holmes Canon and Transformative Works. Lulu.com, 2015.
---. “Mrs Hudson.” Femme Friday: Celebrating the Women in the Sherlock Holmes Canon and Transformative Works, edited by Maria Fleischhack, Lulu.com, 2015, pp. 47-50.
Fuller, Margaret. Woman in the Nineteenth Century and Kindred Papers Relating to the Sphere, Condition and Duties, of Woman. Project Gutenberg, 2012, https://www.gutenberg.org/files/8642/8642-h/8642-h.htm (Accessed on 9 March 2020).
Gavin, Adrienne E. “Feminist Crime Fiction and Female Sleuths.” A Companion to Crime Fiction, edited by Charles J. Rzepka and Lee Horsley, Blackwell, 2010, pp. 258-269.
Gordon, Megan R. “Women: Worldly, Wordy, or Un-written: An Analysis of the Women of Sherlock Holmes and the Victorian English Era.” Rollins Undergraduate Research Journal, vol. 5, no. 2, 2011, pp. 1-5.
Gregory Klein, Kathleen. The Woman Detective: Gender & Genre. U of Illinois P, 1995.
Györi, Zsolt and Gabriella Moise, editors. Travelling around Cultures: Collected Essays on Literature and Art. Cambridge Scholars, 2016.
Haile, Resa and Tamara R. Bower, editors. Villains, Victims and Violets: Agency and Feminism in the Original Sherlock Holmes Canon. Brown Walker, 2019.
Hall, Geoff. “Recent Developments in Uses of Literature in Language Teaching.” Literature and Language Learning in the EFL Classroom, edited by Masayuki Teranishi, Palgrave Macmillan, 2015, pp. 13-25.
Horsley, Lee. Twentieth-Century Crime Fiction. Oxford UP, 2005.
116 Humm, Maggie. “Feminist Detective Fiction.” Twentieth-Century Suspense: The Thriller Comes of Age, edited by Clive Bloom, Palgrave Macmillan, 1990, pp. 237- 255.
Irons, Glenwood, editor. Feminism in Women’s Detective Fiction. 1995. U of Toronto P, 2014.
Isokoski, Mari. The Victorian Middle Class, Imperialist Attitude and Women in Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes Adventures. 2008. University of Tampere, thesis.
Janik, Erika. Pistols and Petticoats: 175 Years of Lady Detectives in Fact and Fiction. Beacon Press, 2016.
Jann, Rosemary. “Sherlock Holmes Codes the Social Body.” ELH, vol. 57 no. 3, 1990, pp. 686-708. JSTOR, doi: 10.2307/2873238.
Jenainati, Cathy and Judy Groves. Introducing Feminism. Icons Books, 2007.
Jenkins, Hilary, editor. Introduction. Wide Sargasso Seas Jean Rhys. Penguin Students Books, 2001.
Jones, Jane C. “Is Sherlock sexist? Moffat’s wanton women.” The Guardian, 3 Jan. 2012, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/03/sherlock-sexist- steven-moffat (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Kerber, Linda K. “From the Declaration of Independence to the Declaration of Sentiments: The Legal Status of Women in the Early Republic 1776-1848.” Human Rights, vol. 6, no. 2, 1977, pp. 115-124. JSTOR https://www.jstor.org/stable/27879046 (Accessed on 11 March 2020)
117 Kirchknopf, Andrea. “’A Scandal in Bohemia’ to ‘Clowns’: The Decreasing Power of Irene Adler in TV Adaptations of Sherlock.” Travelling around Cultures: Collected Essays on Literature and Art, edited by Zsolt Györi and Gabriella Moise, Cambridge Scholars, 2016, pp. 143-163.
Knight, Stephen. Crime Fiction, 1800-2000: Detection, Death, Diversity. Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
Luebering, J.E. “Detective Story: Narrative Genre.” Encyclopædia Britannica, 2007. https://www.britannica.com/art/detective-story-narrative-genre (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Makinen, Merja. Feminist Popular Fiction. Palgrave Macmillan, 2001.
McCain, Katharine. “’Feeling Exposed?’ Irene Adler and the Self-Reflective Disguise.” Gender and the Modern Sherlock Holmes: Essays on Film and Television Adaptations Since 2009, edited by Nadine Farghaly, McFarland, pp. 85-98.
Munt, Sally R. Murder by the Book? Feminism and the crime novel. Routledge, 2005.
Murphy, Patricia. “Reevaluating Female ‘Inferiority’: Sarah Grand versus Charles Darwin.” Victorian Literature and Culture, vol. 26, no. 2, 1998, pp. 221-236. JSTOR, doi:10.1017/s1060150300002394.
Naidu, Sam, editor. Sherlock Holmes in Context. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
Nünning, Ansgar. Von historischer Fiktion zu historiographischer Metafiktion 1: Theorie Typologie und Poetik des historischen Romans. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 1995.
118 Nünning, Vera. “Britische und amerikanische Krimianlromane: Genrekonventionedn und neuere Entwicklungstendenzen.” Handbuch: Der Amerikanische und Britische Kriminalroman: Genre-Entwicklungen-Modellinterpretationen, edited by Vera Nünning, Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 2008, pp. 1-26.
---, editor. Handbuch: Der Amerikanische und Britische Kriminalroman: Genre- Entwicklungen-Modellinterpretationen. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 2008.
Philipps, Jennifer. “A Woman in a Man’s (Fictional) World: Considering the Importance of Dr. Molly Hooper in the BBC’s Modern Adaptation of Sherlock.” Women in STEM on Television: Critical Essays, edited by Ashley L. Carlson, McFarland, 2018, pp. 170-186.
Poole, Cassandra. “’The Woman’ and the Women of Sherlock Holmes.” James Madison Undergraduate Research Journal, vol. 1, no. 1, 2014, pp. 16-23.
Priestman, Martin, editor. The Cambridge Companion to Crime Fiction. Cambridge UP, 2003.
Primorac, Antonija. Neo-Victorianism on Screen: Postfeminism and Contemporary Adaptations of Victorian Women. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.
---. “The Naked Truth: The Postfeminist Afterlives of Irene Adler.” Journal of Neo- Victorian Studies, vol. 6, no. 2, 2013, pp. 89-113.
Reddy, Maureen T. Sisters in Crime: Feminism and the Crime Novel. Continuum, 1988.
---. “Women Detectives.” The Cambridge Companion to Crime Fiction, edited by Martin Priestman, Cambridge UP, 2003, pp. 191-207.
Riley, Dick and Pam McAllister. The Bedside, Bathtub & Armchair Companion to Sherlock Holmes. Continuum, 1999.
119 Richardson, Angelique and Chris Willis, editors. The New Woman in Fiction and in Fact: Fin-de-siècle Feminism. Palgrave Macmillan, 2001.
Rzepka, Charles J. and Lee Horsley, editors. A Companion to Crime Fiction. Blackwell, 2010.
Shanley, Mary L. Feminism, Marriage and the Law in Victorian England. Princeton UP, 1989.
“Sherlock Uncovered: The Women.” YouTube, uploaded by Sherlock, 27. Jan. 2014, www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW6j7jcwdf8. (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Slung, Michelle B. Crime on Her Mind: Fifteen Stories of Female Sleuths from the Victorian Era to the Forties. Pantheon Books, 1975.
Stasio, Marylin. “Lady Gumshoes: Boiled Less Hard.” The New York Times, 18 Apr. 1985, https://www.nytimes.com/1985/04/28/books/lady-gumshoes-boiled-less- hard.html. (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Sulcas, Roslyn. “’Sherlock Opens Up the Old Boys’ Club to Women.” The New York Times, 23 Apr. 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/arts/television/sherlock-bbc-women.html. (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Teranishi, Masayuki et al., editors. Literature and Language Learning in the EFL Classroom. Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
Teranishi, Masayuki. “Teaching English Novels in the EFL Classroom.” Literature and Language Learning in the EFL Classroom, edited by Masayuki Teranishi et al., Palgrave Macmillan, 2015, pp. 167-181.
Thomas, Amy. “Molly Hooper.” Femme Friday: Celebrating the Women in the Sherlock Holmes Canon and Transformative Works, edited by Maria Fleischhack, Lulu.com, pp. 37-41.
120 Vicinus, Martha, editor. A Widening Sphere: Changing Roles of Victorian Women. Routledge, 2013. Walton, Priscilla L. and Manina Jones. Detective Agency: Women Rewriting the Hard-Boiled Tradition. U of California P, 1999.
“Women in Victorian England.” YouTube, uploaded by Anna Kopyra, 8 Sept. 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYHsYBa-tGQ&t=2s (Accessed on 13 March 2020)
Zimmermann, Bonnie K. “Exiting from Patriarchy: The Lesbian Novel of Development.” The Voyage in: Fictions of Female Development, edited by Elizabeth Abel et al., UP of New England, 1983, pp. 244-257.
8.3. Digital Images
Currier & Ives. “Age of Brass: Or the Triumphs of Woman’s Rights” The New York Times, 25 Jul. 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/25/arts/design/rebel- women-museum-of-the-city-of-new-york.html. (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
Rehak, Melanie. “Who Made that Twitter Bird.” The New York Times, 8 Aug. 2014, https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/10/magazine/who-made-that-twitter-bird.html (Accessed on 14 March 2020)
“Women’s Fashions of the Late Victorian Era.” 5 Minute History, 2016, https://fiveminutehistory.com/fashions-of-the-late-victorian-era/. (Accessed on 9 March 2020)
121