This article is devoted to the study Sherlock Holmes’ image as a professional and to his qualities and skills that made him the immortal standard of a professional detective-consultant. The article examines about his career and brilliant investigation of crimes and the methods of his work which are based on the deductive method. And it is impossible to write about him without his world of view, philosophy, moral values and how they affected to Mr.Holmes professional work. His image is given on the basis of comparison of his character with his enemies and opponents, friends and police from Scotland Yard.
Key words: image, professional, deduction, crime, murder, detective-consultant.
The image of the person is an art generalization of human properties, traits of character in individual shape of the hero. The profession shows an extent of socialization of the hero, determines his role in society. Regardless of belonging to a field of activity, any professional represents the full-fledged finished image consisting of more or less significant components; set and which structure constantly change under the influence of such external factors as social and economic development.
Detective literature is “a type of the literature including works of art which plot is devoted to disclosure of a mysterious crime, usually by means of the logical analysis of the facts. A conflict basis most often is the collision of justice with lawlessness which is coming to the end with victory of justice” [1, 21]. Such famous writers as E.A.Poe, G.K.Chesterton, A.C.Doyle, G.Leru, E.Wallace, S.S.Van Dine, D.Hammett, E.Quinn, were the first developers of this genre and its apologists.
V.Rudnev explains feature of the genre of the detective with the fact that “the main element of the genre consists available in it the main character – a detective-investigator, as a rule, private, who solves or detects a crime. The main contents of the detective story constitute, thus, search of the truth. Function of the detective (what there were its methods) does not come down to a secret solution at all. In addition, in it the radical difference E.A.Poe’s character – Dupen, who was occupied only by a secret solution, but not exposure of the criminal. Detectives combine functions of an investigating officer, a prosecutor, a defender, and frequently an executioner. They personify the highest and impartial justice, recover the truth where the law is powerless [2, 76].
Therefore, the subject of the article is an immortal image of the great detective Sherlock Holmes created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. A writer on his celebration of the seventieth anniversary marked: “Do you know that I am not a creator of Sherlock Holmes’ image? These are readers , who created him in their imagination” [3, 100].
The name “Sherlock Holmes” became nominal for designation of those who are a detective in a varying degree. For the first time readers meet a great detective in the story “A Study in Scarlet”. John Watson’s old colleague, Mr. Stamford, in general told about Holmes’ professional skills and about his personality. He said that his acquaintance who worked in hospital’s chemical laboratory looked for an accommodation. Stamford described his friend as the somewhat eccentric enthusiast, at the same time quite decent person.
In any profession, there are the code of the principles and standards of behavior. The profession of the detective did not become an exception. A detective’s basic code principle of is the principle of trust. It means that detective’s activity is entirely based on the trust put in him. As in any profession there is the code of the principles and standards of behavior, it should be taken into account to our main character from this point of view, to make sure, as far as he follows detective’s code. Therefore, the principles and norms given below consist of nine points: principle of trust, principle of detective’s independence, professional secrecy, moral bases, and relations with principals, collision of interests, corporate solidarity, honorarium policy and ban of advertising [4]. We will take into consideration each point, being guided by short stories about Sherlock Holmes.
The first principle and undoubtedly the most important is the principle of trust. Noblemen, sometimes even monarchs often addressed the detective, and told their secrets to Mr. Holmes. He gained the reputation of a competent person; otherwise, half of those who addressed him could not deal with their problems, but would got into bigger problem, trying to solve a small one. For example, it is possible to take the king of Bohemia who told to the detective story of the affair with Iren Adler. In addition, Sherlock’s brother – Mycroft, used to address him for solving problems of a large scale, even the world. Sherlock always followed the first principle and never deceived trust of the clients and did not use their weakness in his own favor.
The second principle consists in detective’s independence. Mr. Holmes didn’t depend on anyone, he had no chief, he worked for himself and never submitted to police officers from Scotland Yard. Every time, coming to the crime scene, he appeared as the main figure, by force, advancing business, and the others submitted to him and implicitly followed each his word, as he never asked empty requests. It can be observed on behavior of such police officers as Lestrade,
Gregson, Hopkins and Jones. Even when noblemen addressed Sherlock, he did not fawn upon them and equally treated both the rich and the poor.
Sherlock also strictly adhered to the principle of professional secrecy. Often John Watson wrote and more than once mentioned that there is a set of cases, which could be interesting to the readers, but as Sherlock Holmes forbidden him to tell them because of political or other reasons, the writer could not disclose in a certain way details of most sensational crimes. Sometimes there passed years and decades before Dr.Watson wrote about tall tales from noblemen’s life. Only when this or that story stopped being threat for the client, Sherlock permitted to publish the course of his investigations, though often complained to Watson that he neglected detective’s method and drew readers’ attention to insignificant sentimentality.
As for moral bases, Sherlock Holmes’ image is ambiguous here. On the one hand, he was a very competent, pedantic and always finished business even if his client died or, apparently, a case was too obvious and a murderer was found. He used disguise and psychological tricks to obtain information, from time to time hid his participation or the personality, which was an integral part of detective’s activity. At the same time, he had moral foundations, which sometimes contradicted the word of the law. Thus, relying on the experience and opinion, Mr. Holmes sometimes didn’t reveal the identity of the criminal. Besides, weight a crime of these people was weak, and the detective distinguished that they are, in some sense, the victims. If to speak about the detective’s relation with principals, then he always held a distance, subordination, addressed all with polite courtesy and with great attention while listening to their stories.
Next principle is a collision of interests. Usually the detective did not support two parties at once and dealt doubly, but during the investigation he reckoned with the clients’ interests.
If we stop on the principle of corporate solidarity, then Mr. Holmes did not regard police officers from Scotland Yard as the colleagues. They only were those who asked him for help. He stated that they could not cope with the simplest cases; there was nothing to say about those which even he couldn’t solve. Sherlock treated them with indulgence, but at the same time he didn’t belittle and humiliated in the face of his clients. He declared that he was a detective-consultant, a unique one therefore his only aim was to solve a crime and catch the murderers.
We also should mention honorarium policy. Mr.Holmes often worked free. He did not demand money from the poor. He said to those who could give money that he would take from them only travel expenses. In the case with “The Adventure of the Six Napoleons” Sherlock was presented the black pearl of Borgias. He was flattered and grateful to such gift, but it was visible that he was not interested in the value of the pearl, but in that, his works were appreciated. He seldom demanded money from his clients, except for the most prosperous. However, it should be noted that in the short story “The adventure of the Priory School” where the Duke’s son vanished, Holmes demanded the promised remuneration after solving the case. This fact said that our hero was an ordinary person from flesh and blood, who had the need as food and housing, and they cost money.
In addition, the last principle is advertising ban. It is also worth noting that before Dr.Watson’s appearance in Sherlock’s life, our detective was in demand, but with a publication of stories about their adventures, his popularity increased up to heaven. People began to send letters with interesting cases in a large number, haunted his threshold on Baker Street 221 B with a request to untangle complex cases. Our detective never treated such sort of popularity with delight, though in the beginnings he complained that all the credits had got by police officers from Scotland Yard. After publication John Watson’s short stories and novels, people finally found out who actually discloses the majority of crime in the country. Thus, we can openly say that Sherlock Holmes adhered to the general code of the detective. There were exceptional cases when he had to violate a particular rule, but this was not harmful to his clients or other innocent people.
Let us focus on detective’s special qualities and skills. One of his most significant features is an absorbing concrete thing. He paid much attention to those fields of the science, which could be useful for him in his further investigations. We mentioned Dr.Watson’s acquaintance with Mr. Stamford. Therefore, as far as Stamford knew, Mr. Holmes succeeded in anatomy, also was first-
class chemist, but he did not go in for systematic medicine. Still Holmes saved up a large amount of collateral knowledge to which professors would envy. Sherlock either would sit in laboratory from morning to the night, or would not show up for weeks. According to him, Mr.Holmes did not remember anything that would not be useful for the solution of the problems. Watson was surprised with the fact that Holmes’s knowledge and education were unsystematic. Holmes explains that he saw a human brain as an empty attic. Someone would drag there everything he got, someone the things which could really be necessary for him. So, a reasonable person arranged the intellectual attic with exclusively necessary tools which he would keep in an ideal order. As a result, John compiled a list called “Sherlock Holmes – his Limits”.
There he enumerated Sherlock’s knowledge in literature, philosophy and astronomy were equal to zero, and he understood politics poorly, in botany he was informed only in properties of poisonous plants. He studied geology well: by the form of splashes on trousers he defined in what part of London, they were received. He had extensive and profound knowledge in the field of chemistry and the British legislation. He understood anatomy, but not systematically, and his knowledge in the history of criminalistics was exhaustive. As for sport: he perfectly fenced, boxed, brilliantly owned cold weapon.
The fact that Sherlock Holmes was absorbed with his business mentioned above. When he listened to the clients’ stories, he often closed his eyes and concentrated, adjusted on the special wave, asked the specifying questions. Even then, his powerful mind lined up the chain of events, but he never disclosed his speculation as long as no proof that his guesses were correct. He could be rough if the person distracted him, having broken his train of thought. The person who was nearby had to have great endurance and patience because Mr. Holmes would reveal a secret only when he counted it necessary. He could not explain the reason of the request, but urged something vital. His companion had to be prepared for putting on early in the morning and to get on the train, which went to other county to open another business. Sherlock signified that it was always easier for him to guess, than to explain how he did it, otherwise, he relied upon the professional intuition, but also took into account logic. Logic played a big role in the process of his investigation. In his opinion, a perfect detective had to have three main qualities: an ability to observe, then making conclusion according to this observations and the last one is – to have sufficient knowledge.
Observation was his second nature. All course of his thoughts rushed in the head less than a second, as a result, Sherlock defined a person’s profession, the right-handed person he was or the lefthander, how many ordeals fell on his head and so forth. Thus, he often surprised the visitors and potential clients, straight off defining their profession and tendencies, sometimes even by defining the reason of their arrival in advance. Naturally, people were interested in the way he learned about this or that detail of their lives, and then a detective explained his train of thought, as a result, it seemed really simple.
It should be noted that Sherlock clearly understood human psychology. For example, in the story “A Scandal in Bohemia” he precisely knew that a woman would save first the things that were the most important for her. In this case, that was coveted photo, which the king of Bohemia tried to receive. In a few other stories Sherlock has to learn that, he interested in by using the following trick: he pretended to be silly and naive person, so gradually got necessary information to him from the interlocutor. In “The Sign of the Four” Holmes pretended to be the simple-minded man who was confused with the simple facts and thus found from a woman where her husband and son were the day earlier. He showed deductive method, surveying the room, having surprised Watson once again, and then traced the murderer by means of a tracker dog, Toby, whom Sherlock appreciated more than police officers from Scotland Yard. Besides the homeless children who were hanging around all London owing to be Sherlock’s eyes and ears, i.e. his informants.
Passion for science. Mr. Holmes was obsessed with science, and sometimes his obsession bordered on callousness. He loved scientific experiments; he was quite capable to give a person pinch of a new type of poison so he could subsequently record its influence. He was extremely engrossed in his work that he could himself take poisonous medicine. Also Stamford added that from time to time Holmes was capable to cross the borders. For example, in order to check during
what time after death bruises could be formed on a body, he beat corpses with a stick in autopsy room. He tended to check everything by himself to be sure in the correctness of his suppositions. When he found the answer to the question tormented him for a long time he expressed rough delight. In some situations, he was sometimes so eccentric and excited; in other cases, he was reserved, closed and silent. Often he tortured his companions without revealing to them the details of the case. Only after solving the riddle in mind, he satisfied his companions’ curiosity. After finding a way to carry out unmistakably exact analysis of blood traces, he came to the wild delight, and lamented that many cases could be uncovered if the analysis would not depend on the standing of the spots. Stamford’s last remark was that he calls Mr. Holmes “the walking encyclopedia of crimes”. So, this qualities show that he was professional.
Resilience. When Holmes engaged in business, his energy seemed inexhaustible; he fell into a rage work. Most often before the reader appeared the following scene: people who got into trouble, looking for the help come to Baker Street, 221B. Sherlock listened to them, sometimes he unraveled the tangle with which others failed even without leaving the room. In other cases, he had to go to the city or even to the countryside. It is worth to mention that a detective got a card file in his living room, the whole system of registration of the different facts, which concerned people and important events. Quite often, he asked for the help to encyclopedia. Besides, if in appearance Sherlock kept immaculate cleanliness and order, when it came to the papers which concerned this or that business in which he was engaged, a detective hated to throw them out, but at the same time he put them in order only once or twice a year. In addition, detective-consultant got a commemorative book, where he always made his records. During his practice, he published several works: brochures “Definition of grades of tobacco on ashes”, works about prints of traces, about influence of professions on a shape of a hand, the monograph “Polyphonic Moteta of Lassus”. “The Adventure of the Lion’s Mane” was the detective’s work about his own investigation told by himself.
Practicing deduction. Sherlock declared that he earned a living by means of deduction which besides had big practical benefits. His deductive method was as follows: he found and compared all facts and proofs, and on their basis solved a crime. In other words, he rewinded actions until when the crime had been committed. Thus, he found the criminal. His method was called “deductive”; however, it actually was inductive, because of the particular judgments made common. For example, at the crime scene a detective deferred traces, looked for stubs, and other hints left by a criminal, then he defined a murder tool and motive of a crime, afterwards he found the criminal.
He was a unique detective-consultant. He was offended when in “A Study in Scarlet” Watson compared Sherlock to Dupin. He admitted that Dupin was not deprived of analytical skills, but his conclusions were calculated on effect. After he contemptuously spoke of Gaboriau’s detective– Lecoq, called him contemptible “shoemaker”. His only plus, according to Sherlock, was vigorous energy. Nevertheless, for identification of the criminal took him half a year. Sherlock notified that he could make the same per day. In the beginning, John treated him as self-confident; however, some time later, having become a witness of his neighbor’s improbable abilities, a retired doctor accepted that his self-confidence was to some extent justified. For example, John thought he was the boaster and the poseur before Sherlock defined a passerby’s profession.
He differed from a great number of private detectives in the fact that these detectives addressed him when they reached a deadlock, and Sherlock directed them on a right trace. They brought all proofs or tried to keep the crime scene untouched until a detective made his investigation. Sherlock helped them to deal with the help of knowledge in the field of crime history and a deduction method. He stated that between crimes there was a strong patrimonial similarity. In addition, if the detective was informed in all details of the same crimes, without doubts it was easy to untangle them. Sherlock complained that the person with extensive knowledge and the allocated talent for investigation of crimes did not have the real crimes and true criminals in his days. He even for fun said that London was lucky that he did not have any intentions to become a criminal.
The beginning of the career and talent of deciphering. Watson quite a while tried to find out from Sherlock what was his first case that led him on to become a detective. One evening Mr. Holmes handed him a paper with these words: “The supply of game for London is going steadily
up. Head-keeper Hudson, we believe, had been now told to receive all orders for fly-paper and for preservation of your hen-pheasant’s life” [5]. Then he asked Watson whether the name of his friend Victor Trevor was familiar to him. Sherlock recognized that in student’s years he had little in common with his peers therefore he sat in his room, thinking and analyzing everything that was happening around him, creating his own method. Trevor was his complete opposite of his form- mate: cheerful and vigorous young man, but they had a lot in common. A friend suggested Sherlock to spend vacation in his manor where our key character met Trevor’s father. The old man did not trust in Sherlock’s method therefore he intended to test him out. After well aimed and extraordinary exact facts, such as that he made a fortune in the gold mines, had been in New Zealand and practiced boxing, he was amazed. In addition, Sherlock called initials of the person of whom an old man was afraid. He then fainted, later told Sherlock that he would become a great detective, the others were just children in comparison with him. At that moment, Mr. Holmes thought for the first time that he could make his hobby into a profession. Later he deciphered the letter, which caused old man to fell ill, and then led him to death. It stated: “The game is up. Hudson told all. Fly for your life” [5].
Sherlock likewise showed the ability of decoding in the story “The Adventure of the Dancing Man”. Mr. Hilton Cubitt asked a detective for help. His wife, having received the strange message containing a number of the dancing little men began to behave strangely. Our detective laboriously worked on an encryption, and finally he could deceive the person who sent all messages. He at once guessed that, at first, writing would be address to an addressee by the name, thus, he guessed the first three letters, and therefore, a secret of the dancing little men gradually was revealed. We should draw attention to that Sherlock was also no stranger to mistakes. In this story, he was late with a visit to Mr. Cubitt’s house that finally led his owner to death on accidental combination of circumstances. Having learned about his client’s death, a detective swore that he would surely find the murderer and make so that he would be responsible for a crime. However, Mr. Holmes was not always adhered to this conviction. There were cases when he allowed a murderer or a criminal to escape from the eye of the law. For instance, in the story “The Boscombe Valley Mystery” Sherlock eventually opened case and gave to fatally sick old man, Mr. John Turner an opportunity not to blacken his name by the end of the mortal life. Attenuating circumstance for it was that the killed blackmailed Mr. Turner and tried to ruin his daughter’s life.
Talent of transformation. Sherlock’s unusual skills of impersonation were described in several stories. One of them is “The Man with the Twisted Lip”. By then John Watson was married, and his wife’s best friend asked him to find her husband, Isa Whitney. In search of the poor fellow, Watson met a tall old man, skinny and weak, crooked under the weight of the years. In him, John did not recognize his friend until Sherlock himself for a moment straightened up and gives him a hint. However hardly he approached Sherlock, he again entered an image and turned into a helpless old man with flabby lips, intoxicated with opium. The great detective disguised in order to collect information about Mr. Neville St. Clair’s disappearance. In this case, masking helped him; however, there were also cases when his tricks were not successful. As an example, it is possible to take the story “A Scandal in Bohemia” where Sherlock Holmes met an opponent worthy to himself moreover in a woman’s face. Up to this point, a detective very offensively spoke of female mind, but this woman got to his core and used his own weapon against him. Sherlock called Irene Adler “the Woman”, and she attracted interest in him. Irene kept the incriminating photos of the German monarch. He asked a detective for help, and Mr. Holmes agreed to do so. To get into Ms. Adler’s house, Holmes changed clothes in the simple priest. Watson made a point that he was changed not only externally, but also his manner, facial expressions and his soul were changed. Watson sincerely reckoned that if Holmes had not chosen investigation of crimes as a profession, then he could become a brilliant actor or a great thinker.
Finally, as the cruelest rival Holmes took into account professor Moriarty, about whom we learned from the story “The Final Problem”. A detective acknowledged that if he saved society from this criminal; this business would become a wreath of his activity. Sherlock named him “Napoleon of crime” and “one of the best minds of Europe” [7]. At the same time, he was
incredibly cruel, and his incredible mind did not hold back stiffness, and even strengthened it. For a long time Sherlock interfered with the head of criminal society of London so that he had to visit a detective and warn that he should stop, otherwise professor himself would take care of elimination of a problem. As a result, professor Moriarty perished in the Reichenbach Falls, and Sherlock Holmes who was officially regarded as the dead disappeared and continued the activity that was to catch Moriarty’s henchmen.
The main character – Sherlock Holmes appeared in every story, and the others round him all the time. Therefore, it turned out that all Scotland Yard remained helpless if there were not a great detective and his irreplaceable method. Such police officers as Inspector Lestrade, Gregson, Jones, Bradstreet and Hopkins appeared and replaced each other, having had little effect on the course of the investigation. At first, they tried to win over Mr.Holmes, but some time later, they had to acknowledge the superiority of a detective, so they reluctantly handed him the reins. Sherlock passed for none of them as equal to himself, though he would think that Hopkins showed quite good inclinations of a detective. Dr.Watson mentioned Sherlock Holmes’ several unsolved cases in “The Problem of Thor Bridge”: James Phillimore’s disappearance, traces of the cutter “Alicia” and murder of Mr. Isadora Persano.
A detective coped with his cases, and almost in every story, he did not disappoint the readers, acting on a code of honor. After a careful analysis of Sherlock Holmes’ image as a professional, one can safely say that the reader can learn the following: First, to be informed in the sphere of his activity, to develop, not to be behind the time and progress of this or that science. Secondly, to be focused on your profession, study only what can be needed in the process of the work. Thirdly, follow the code relative to their profession, but also do not forget about morality and humanity. To all of the above, you can add diligence, systematic study and finding a hobby, to be distracted from time to time and relax from the main work. He was a great professional in his business, a unique individual and extraordinary gifted personality. Sherlock Holmes was a benchmark of professionalism, which is probably why he still lives in the hearts of the readers.
References
1 Анцыферова О. Ю. Детективный жанр и романтическая художественная система // Национальная специфика произведений зарубежной литературы XIX–XX веков. Проблема жанра. – Иваново: Издательство ИвГУ, 1994. – С. 21–36.
2 Вольский Н. Н. Лёгкое чтение. Работы по теории и истории детективного жанра. – Новосибирск : НГПУ, 2006. – 278 с.
3 Еремин В.Н. 100 великих литературных героев.– Москва: Вече, 2014 г.– 432 с.
4 http://detectiv58.ru/
5 Дойл А. К. Полное собрание сочинений о Шерлоке Холмсе в одном томе. М., 2007.
6 Весь Шерлок Холмс. Вариации: Сборник. / Ред.-сост. А.В. Коротнян, СПб.: Лениздат, 1994. – 291 с.
Данная статья посвящена изучению образа великого детектива Шерлока Холмса. Образ профессионала состоит из определенных значимых компонентов, набор и структура которых меняются из-за различных внешних факторов. В этой статье Шерлок Холмс рассматривается как профессионал своего дела, анализируются его принципы работы, о методах работы, в том числе о его знаменитом дедуктивном методе, а также о других принципах , которых он придерживался при работе, то есть о кодексе детектива. А также представлены и другие отличительные черты данного образа, его характер, его развитие как личности.
Бұл мақала ұлы детектив Шерлок Холмстың бейнесін зерделеуге арналған. Маманның бейнесі маңызды компонеттерден, олардың жиынтығы мен құрылысы әр алуан сыртқы факторлардың өзгеруінен құралады. Бұл мақалада Шерлок Холмстың жұмыс барысында ұстайтын принциптері мен әдістері , соның ішіндегі әйгілі дедуктивтік
әдістемесі және басқада ұстаған принциптері туралы сараптама берілген. Сонымен қатар бейненің тұлға ретінде қалыптасудағы оның мінез-құлқының ерекшеліктері туралы жазылған.
SHERLOCK HOLMES AS A MODEL OF PROFESSIONALISM
This article is devoted to the study Sherlock Holmes’ image as a professional and to his qualities and skills that made him the immortal standard of a professional detective-consultant. The article examines about his career and brilliant investigation of crimes and the methods of his work which are based on the deductive method. And it is impossible to write about him without his world of view, philosophy, moral values and how they affected to Mr.Holmes professional work. His image is given on the basis of comparison of his character with his enemies and opponents, friends and police from Scotland Yard.
Key words: image, professional, deduction, crime, murder, detective-consultant.
The image of the person is an art generalization of human properties, traits of character in individual shape of the hero. The profession shows an extent of socialization of the hero, determines his role in society. Regardless of belonging to a field of activity, any professional represents the full-fledged finished image consisting of more or less significant components; set and which structure constantly change under the influence of such external factors as social and economic development.
Detective literature is “a type of the literature including works of art which plot is devoted to disclosure of a mysterious crime, usually by means of the logical analysis of the facts. A conflict basis most often is the collision of justice with lawlessness which is coming to the end with victory of justice” [1, 21]. Such famous writers as E.A.Poe, G.K.Chesterton, A.C.Doyle, G.Leru, E.Wallace, S.S.Van Dine, D.Hammett, E.Quinn, were the first developers of this genre and its apologists.
V.Rudnev explains feature of the genre of the detective with the fact that “the main element of the genre consists available in it the main character – a detective-investigator, as a rule, private, who solves or detects a crime. The main contents of the detective story constitute, thus, search of the truth. Function of the detective (what there were its methods) does not come down to a secret solution at all. In addition, in it the radical difference E.A.Poe’s character – Dupen, who was occupied only by a secret solution, but not exposure of the criminal. Detectives combine functions of an investigating officer, a prosecutor, a defender, and frequently an executioner. They personify the highest and impartial justice, recover the truth where the law is powerless [2, 76].
Therefore, the subject of the article is an immortal image of the great detective Sherlock Holmes created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. A writer on his celebration of the seventieth anniversary marked: “Do you know that I am not a creator of Sherlock Holmes’ image? These are readers , who created him in their imagination” [3, 100].
The name “Sherlock Holmes” became nominal for designation of those who are a detective in a varying degree. For the first time readers meet a great detective in the story “A Study in Scarlet”. John Watson’s old colleague, Mr. Stamford, in general told about Holmes’ professional skills and about his personality. He said that his acquaintance who worked in hospital’s chemical laboratory looked for an accommodation. Stamford described his friend as the somewhat eccentric enthusiast, at the same time quite decent person.
In any profession, there are the code of the principles and standards of behavior. The profession of the detective did not become an exception. A detective’s basic code principle of is the principle of trust. It means that detective’s activity is entirely based on the trust put in him. As in any profession there is the code of the principles and standards of behavior, it should be taken into account to our main character from this point of view, to make sure, as far as he follows detective’s code. Therefore, the principles and norms given below consist of nine points: principle of trust, principle of detective’s independence, professional secrecy, moral bases, and relations with principals, collision of interests, corporate solidarity, honorarium policy and ban of advertising [4]. We will take into consideration each point, being guided by short stories about Sherlock Holmes.
The first principle and undoubtedly the most important is the principle of trust. Noblemen, sometimes even monarchs often addressed the detective, and told their secrets to Mr. Holmes. He gained the reputation of a competent person; otherwise, half of those who addressed him could not deal with their problems, but would got into bigger problem, trying to solve a small one. For example, it is possible to take the king of Bohemia who told to the detective story of the affair with Iren Adler. In addition, Sherlock’s brother – Mycroft, used to address him for solving problems of a large scale, even the world. Sherlock always followed the first principle and never deceived trust of the clients and did not use their weakness in his own favor.
The second principle consists in detective’s independence. Mr. Holmes didn’t depend on anyone, he had no chief, he worked for himself and never submitted to police officers from Scotland Yard. Every time, coming to the crime scene, he appeared as the main figure, by force, advancing business, and the others submitted to him and implicitly followed each his word, as he never asked empty requests. It can be observed on behavior of such police officers as Lestrade,
Gregson, Hopkins and Jones. Even when noblemen addressed Sherlock, he did not fawn upon them and equally treated both the rich and the poor.
Sherlock also strictly adhered to the principle of professional secrecy. Often John Watson wrote and more than once mentioned that there is a set of cases, which could be interesting to the readers, but as Sherlock Holmes forbidden him to tell them because of political or other reasons, the writer could not disclose in a certain way details of most sensational crimes. Sometimes there passed years and decades before Dr.Watson wrote about tall tales from noblemen’s life. Only when this or that story stopped being threat for the client, Sherlock permitted to publish the course of his investigations, though often complained to Watson that he neglected detective’s method and drew readers’ attention to insignificant sentimentality.
As for moral bases, Sherlock Holmes’ image is ambiguous here. On the one hand, he was a very competent, pedantic and always finished business even if his client died or, apparently, a case was too obvious and a murderer was found. He used disguise and psychological tricks to obtain information, from time to time hid his participation or the personality, which was an integral part of detective’s activity. At the same time, he had moral foundations, which sometimes contradicted the word of the law. Thus, relying on the experience and opinion, Mr. Holmes sometimes didn’t reveal the identity of the criminal. Besides, weight a crime of these people was weak, and the detective distinguished that they are, in some sense, the victims. If to speak about the detective’s relation with principals, then he always held a distance, subordination, addressed all with polite courtesy and with great attention while listening to their stories.
Next principle is a collision of interests. Usually the detective did not support two parties at once and dealt doubly, but during the investigation he reckoned with the clients’ interests.
If we stop on the principle of corporate solidarity, then Mr. Holmes did not regard police officers from Scotland Yard as the colleagues. They only were those who asked him for help. He stated that they could not cope with the simplest cases; there was nothing to say about those which even he couldn’t solve. Sherlock treated them with indulgence, but at the same time he didn’t belittle and humiliated in the face of his clients. He declared that he was a detective-consultant, a unique one therefore his only aim was to solve a crime and catch the murderers.
We also should mention honorarium policy. Mr.Holmes often worked free. He did not demand money from the poor. He said to those who could give money that he would take from them only travel expenses. In the case with “The Adventure of the Six Napoleons” Sherlock was presented the black pearl of Borgias. He was flattered and grateful to such gift, but it was visible that he was not interested in the value of the pearl, but in that, his works were appreciated. He seldom demanded money from his clients, except for the most prosperous. However, it should be noted that in the short story “The adventure of the Priory School” where the Duke’s son vanished, Holmes demanded the promised remuneration after solving the case. This fact said that our hero was an ordinary person from flesh and blood, who had the need as food and housing, and they cost money.
In addition, the last principle is advertising ban. It is also worth noting that before Dr.Watson’s appearance in Sherlock’s life, our detective was in demand, but with a publication of stories about their adventures, his popularity increased up to heaven. People began to send letters with interesting cases in a large number, haunted his threshold on Baker Street 221 B with a request to untangle complex cases. Our detective never treated such sort of popularity with delight, though in the beginnings he complained that all the credits had got by police officers from Scotland Yard. After publication John Watson’s short stories and novels, people finally found out who actually discloses the majority of crime in the country. Thus, we can openly say that Sherlock Holmes adhered to the general code of the detective. There were exceptional cases when he had to violate a particular rule, but this was not harmful to his clients or other innocent people.
Let us focus on detective’s special qualities and skills. One of his most significant features is an absorbing concrete thing. He paid much attention to those fields of the science, which could be useful for him in his further investigations. We mentioned Dr.Watson’s acquaintance with Mr. Stamford. Therefore, as far as Stamford knew, Mr. Holmes succeeded in anatomy, also was first-
class chemist, but he did not go in for systematic medicine. Still Holmes saved up a large amount of collateral knowledge to which professors would envy. Sherlock either would sit in laboratory from morning to the night, or would not show up for weeks. According to him, Mr.Holmes did not remember anything that would not be useful for the solution of the problems. Watson was surprised with the fact that Holmes’s knowledge and education were unsystematic. Holmes explains that he saw a human brain as an empty attic. Someone would drag there everything he got, someone the things which could really be necessary for him. So, a reasonable person arranged the intellectual attic with exclusively necessary tools which he would keep in an ideal order. As a result, John compiled a list called “Sherlock Holmes – his Limits”.
There he enumerated Sherlock’s knowledge in literature, philosophy and astronomy were equal to zero, and he understood politics poorly, in botany he was informed only in properties of poisonous plants. He studied geology well: by the form of splashes on trousers he defined in what part of London, they were received. He had extensive and profound knowledge in the field of chemistry and the British legislation. He understood anatomy, but not systematically, and his knowledge in the history of criminalistics was exhaustive. As for sport: he perfectly fenced, boxed, brilliantly owned cold weapon.
The fact that Sherlock Holmes was absorbed with his business mentioned above. When he listened to the clients’ stories, he often closed his eyes and concentrated, adjusted on the special wave, asked the specifying questions. Even then, his powerful mind lined up the chain of events, but he never disclosed his speculation as long as no proof that his guesses were correct. He could be rough if the person distracted him, having broken his train of thought. The person who was nearby had to have great endurance and patience because Mr. Holmes would reveal a secret only when he counted it necessary. He could not explain the reason of the request, but urged something vital. His companion had to be prepared for putting on early in the morning and to get on the train, which went to other county to open another business. Sherlock signified that it was always easier for him to guess, than to explain how he did it, otherwise, he relied upon the professional intuition, but also took into account logic. Logic played a big role in the process of his investigation. In his opinion, a perfect detective had to have three main qualities: an ability to observe, then making conclusion according to this observations and the last one is – to have sufficient knowledge.
Observation was his second nature. All course of his thoughts rushed in the head less than a second, as a result, Sherlock defined a person’s profession, the right-handed person he was or the lefthander, how many ordeals fell on his head and so forth. Thus, he often surprised the visitors and potential clients, straight off defining their profession and tendencies, sometimes even by defining the reason of their arrival in advance. Naturally, people were interested in the way he learned about this or that detail of their lives, and then a detective explained his train of thought, as a result, it seemed really simple.
It should be noted that Sherlock clearly understood human psychology. For example, in the story “A Scandal in Bohemia” he precisely knew that a woman would save first the things that were the most important for her. In this case, that was coveted photo, which the king of Bohemia tried to receive. In a few other stories Sherlock has to learn that, he interested in by using the following trick: he pretended to be silly and naive person, so gradually got necessary information to him from the interlocutor. In “The Sign of the Four” Holmes pretended to be the simple-minded man who was confused with the simple facts and thus found from a woman where her husband and son were the day earlier. He showed deductive method, surveying the room, having surprised Watson once again, and then traced the murderer by means of a tracker dog, Toby, whom Sherlock appreciated more than police officers from Scotland Yard. Besides the homeless children who were hanging around all London owing to be Sherlock’s eyes and ears, i.e. his informants.
Passion for science. Mr. Holmes was obsessed with science, and sometimes his obsession bordered on callousness. He loved scientific experiments; he was quite capable to give a person pinch of a new type of poison so he could subsequently record its influence. He was extremely engrossed in his work that he could himself take poisonous medicine. Also Stamford added that from time to time Holmes was capable to cross the borders. For example, in order to check during
what time after death bruises could be formed on a body, he beat corpses with a stick in autopsy room. He tended to check everything by himself to be sure in the correctness of his suppositions. When he found the answer to the question tormented him for a long time he expressed rough delight. In some situations, he was sometimes so eccentric and excited; in other cases, he was reserved, closed and silent. Often he tortured his companions without revealing to them the details of the case. Only after solving the riddle in mind, he satisfied his companions’ curiosity. After finding a way to carry out unmistakably exact analysis of blood traces, he came to the wild delight, and lamented that many cases could be uncovered if the analysis would not depend on the standing of the spots. Stamford’s last remark was that he calls Mr. Holmes “the walking encyclopedia of crimes”. So, this qualities show that he was professional.
Resilience. When Holmes engaged in business, his energy seemed inexhaustible; he fell into a rage work. Most often before the reader appeared the following scene: people who got into trouble, looking for the help come to Baker Street, 221B. Sherlock listened to them, sometimes he unraveled the tangle with which others failed even without leaving the room. In other cases, he had to go to the city or even to the countryside. It is worth to mention that a detective got a card file in his living room, the whole system of registration of the different facts, which concerned people and important events. Quite often, he asked for the help to encyclopedia. Besides, if in appearance Sherlock kept immaculate cleanliness and order, when it came to the papers which concerned this or that business in which he was engaged, a detective hated to throw them out, but at the same time he put them in order only once or twice a year. In addition, detective-consultant got a commemorative book, where he always made his records. During his practice, he published several works: brochures “Definition of grades of tobacco on ashes”, works about prints of traces, about influence of professions on a shape of a hand, the monograph “Polyphonic Moteta of Lassus”. “The Adventure of the Lion’s Mane” was the detective’s work about his own investigation told by himself.
Practicing deduction. Sherlock declared that he earned a living by means of deduction which besides had big practical benefits. His deductive method was as follows: he found and compared all facts and proofs, and on their basis solved a crime. In other words, he rewinded actions until when the crime had been committed. Thus, he found the criminal. His method was called “deductive”; however, it actually was inductive, because of the particular judgments made common. For example, at the crime scene a detective deferred traces, looked for stubs, and other hints left by a criminal, then he defined a murder tool and motive of a crime, afterwards he found the criminal.
He was a unique detective-consultant. He was offended when in “A Study in Scarlet” Watson compared Sherlock to Dupin. He admitted that Dupin was not deprived of analytical skills, but his conclusions were calculated on effect. After he contemptuously spoke of Gaboriau’s detective– Lecoq, called him contemptible “shoemaker”. His only plus, according to Sherlock, was vigorous energy. Nevertheless, for identification of the criminal took him half a year. Sherlock notified that he could make the same per day. In the beginning, John treated him as self-confident; however, some time later, having become a witness of his neighbor’s improbable abilities, a retired doctor accepted that his self-confidence was to some extent justified. For example, John thought he was the boaster and the poseur before Sherlock defined a passerby’s profession.
He differed from a great number of private detectives in the fact that these detectives addressed him when they reached a deadlock, and Sherlock directed them on a right trace. They brought all proofs or tried to keep the crime scene untouched until a detective made his investigation. Sherlock helped them to deal with the help of knowledge in the field of crime history and a deduction method. He stated that between crimes there was a strong patrimonial similarity. In addition, if the detective was informed in all details of the same crimes, without doubts it was easy to untangle them. Sherlock complained that the person with extensive knowledge and the allocated talent for investigation of crimes did not have the real crimes and true criminals in his days. He even for fun said that London was lucky that he did not have any intentions to become a criminal.
The beginning of the career and talent of deciphering. Watson quite a while tried to find out from Sherlock what was his first case that led him on to become a detective. One evening Mr. Holmes handed him a paper with these words: “The supply of game for London is going steadily
up. Head-keeper Hudson, we believe, had been now told to receive all orders for fly-paper and for preservation of your hen-pheasant’s life” [5]. Then he asked Watson whether the name of his friend Victor Trevor was familiar to him. Sherlock recognized that in student’s years he had little in common with his peers therefore he sat in his room, thinking and analyzing everything that was happening around him, creating his own method. Trevor was his complete opposite of his form- mate: cheerful and vigorous young man, but they had a lot in common. A friend suggested Sherlock to spend vacation in his manor where our key character met Trevor’s father. The old man did not trust in Sherlock’s method therefore he intended to test him out. After well aimed and extraordinary exact facts, such as that he made a fortune in the gold mines, had been in New Zealand and practiced boxing, he was amazed. In addition, Sherlock called initials of the person of whom an old man was afraid. He then fainted, later told Sherlock that he would become a great detective, the others were just children in comparison with him. At that moment, Mr. Holmes thought for the first time that he could make his hobby into a profession. Later he deciphered the letter, which caused old man to fell ill, and then led him to death. It stated: “The game is up. Hudson told all. Fly for your life” [5].
Sherlock likewise showed the ability of decoding in the story “The Adventure of the Dancing Man”. Mr. Hilton Cubitt asked a detective for help. His wife, having received the strange message containing a number of the dancing little men began to behave strangely. Our detective laboriously worked on an encryption, and finally he could deceive the person who sent all messages. He at once guessed that, at first, writing would be address to an addressee by the name, thus, he guessed the first three letters, and therefore, a secret of the dancing little men gradually was revealed. We should draw attention to that Sherlock was also no stranger to mistakes. In this story, he was late with a visit to Mr. Cubitt’s house that finally led his owner to death on accidental combination of circumstances. Having learned about his client’s death, a detective swore that he would surely find the murderer and make so that he would be responsible for a crime. However, Mr. Holmes was not always adhered to this conviction. There were cases when he allowed a murderer or a criminal to escape from the eye of the law. For instance, in the story “The Boscombe Valley Mystery” Sherlock eventually opened case and gave to fatally sick old man, Mr. John Turner an opportunity not to blacken his name by the end of the mortal life. Attenuating circumstance for it was that the killed blackmailed Mr. Turner and tried to ruin his daughter’s life.
Talent of transformation. Sherlock’s unusual skills of impersonation were described in several stories. One of them is “The Man with the Twisted Lip”. By then John Watson was married, and his wife’s best friend asked him to find her husband, Isa Whitney. In search of the poor fellow, Watson met a tall old man, skinny and weak, crooked under the weight of the years. In him, John did not recognize his friend until Sherlock himself for a moment straightened up and gives him a hint. However hardly he approached Sherlock, he again entered an image and turned into a helpless old man with flabby lips, intoxicated with opium. The great detective disguised in order to collect information about Mr. Neville St. Clair’s disappearance. In this case, masking helped him; however, there were also cases when his tricks were not successful. As an example, it is possible to take the story “A Scandal in Bohemia” where Sherlock Holmes met an opponent worthy to himself moreover in a woman’s face. Up to this point, a detective very offensively spoke of female mind, but this woman got to his core and used his own weapon against him. Sherlock called Irene Adler “the Woman”, and she attracted interest in him. Irene kept the incriminating photos of the German monarch. He asked a detective for help, and Mr. Holmes agreed to do so. To get into Ms. Adler’s house, Holmes changed clothes in the simple priest. Watson made a point that he was changed not only externally, but also his manner, facial expressions and his soul were changed. Watson sincerely reckoned that if Holmes had not chosen investigation of crimes as a profession, then he could become a brilliant actor or a great thinker.
Finally, as the cruelest rival Holmes took into account professor Moriarty, about whom we learned from the story “The Final Problem”. A detective acknowledged that if he saved society from this criminal; this business would become a wreath of his activity. Sherlock named him “Napoleon of crime” and “one of the best minds of Europe” [7]. At the same time, he was
incredibly cruel, and his incredible mind did not hold back stiffness, and even strengthened it. For a long time Sherlock interfered with the head of criminal society of London so that he had to visit a detective and warn that he should stop, otherwise professor himself would take care of elimination of a problem. As a result, professor Moriarty perished in the Reichenbach Falls, and Sherlock Holmes who was officially regarded as the dead disappeared and continued the activity that was to catch Moriarty’s henchmen.
The main character – Sherlock Holmes appeared in every story, and the others round him all the time. Therefore, it turned out that all Scotland Yard remained helpless if there were not a great detective and his irreplaceable method. Such police officers as Inspector Lestrade, Gregson, Jones, Bradstreet and Hopkins appeared and replaced each other, having had little effect on the course of the investigation. At first, they tried to win over Mr.Holmes, but some time later, they had to acknowledge the superiority of a detective, so they reluctantly handed him the reins. Sherlock passed for none of them as equal to himself, though he would think that Hopkins showed quite good inclinations of a detective. Dr.Watson mentioned Sherlock Holmes’ several unsolved cases in “The Problem of Thor Bridge”: James Phillimore’s disappearance, traces of the cutter “Alicia” and murder of Mr. Isadora Persano.
A detective coped with his cases, and almost in every story, he did not disappoint the readers, acting on a code of honor. After a careful analysis of Sherlock Holmes’ image as a professional, one can safely say that the reader can learn the following: First, to be informed in the sphere of his activity, to develop, not to be behind the time and progress of this or that science. Secondly, to be focused on your profession, study only what can be needed in the process of the work. Thirdly, follow the code relative to their profession, but also do not forget about morality and humanity. To all of the above, you can add diligence, systematic study and finding a hobby, to be distracted from time to time and relax from the main work. He was a great professional in his business, a unique individual and extraordinary gifted personality. Sherlock Holmes was a benchmark of professionalism, which is probably why he still lives in the hearts of the readers.
References
1 Анцыферова О. Ю. Детективный жанр и романтическая художественная система // Национальная специфика произведений зарубежной литературы XIX–XX веков. Проблема жанра. – Иваново: Издательство ИвГУ, 1994. – С. 21–36.
2 Вольский Н. Н. Лёгкое чтение. Работы по теории и истории детективного жанра. – Новосибирск : НГПУ, 2006. – 278 с.
3 Еремин В.Н. 100 великих литературных героев.– Москва: Вече, 2014 г.– 432 с.
4 http://detectiv58.ru/
5 Дойл А. К. Полное собрание сочинений о Шерлоке Холмсе в одном томе. М., 2007.
6 Весь Шерлок Холмс. Вариации: Сборник. / Ред.-сост. А.В. Коротнян, СПб.: Лениздат, 1994. – 291 с.
Данная статья посвящена изучению образа великого детектива Шерлока Холмса. Образ профессионала состоит из определенных значимых компонентов, набор и структура которых меняются из-за различных внешних факторов. В этой статье Шерлок Холмс рассматривается как профессионал своего дела, анализируются его принципы работы, о методах работы, в том числе о его знаменитом дедуктивном методе, а также о других принципах , которых он придерживался при работе, то есть о кодексе детектива. А также представлены и другие отличительные черты данного образа, его характер, его развитие как личности.
Бұл мақала ұлы детектив Шерлок Холмстың бейнесін зерделеуге арналған. Маманның бейнесі маңызды компонеттерден, олардың жиынтығы мен құрылысы әр алуан сыртқы факторлардың өзгеруінен құралады. Бұл мақалада Шерлок Холмстың жұмыс барысында ұстайтын принциптері мен әдістері , соның ішіндегі әйгілі дедуктивтік
әдістемесі және басқада ұстаған принциптері туралы сараптама берілген. Сонымен қатар бейненің тұлға ретінде қалыптасудағы оның мінез-құлқының ерекшеліктері туралы жазылған.