← Back to context

Comment by FridayoLeary

1 day ago

I feel like this article is revisionism. The author is making a wild assumption that no male, no matter the circumstances was presented with having issues or trauma in victorian literature. Being nice and sympathetic is also not a concept which was only discovered recently. The article just throws in key words like mental health to make it sound relevant for today.

Maybe the only interesting part is that drug use was considered (barely) socially acceptable and holmes was still respectable. Note that he wasn't an alcoholic.

Shout out to the bbc adaptation which does a fantastic and hilarious job of portraying holmes as an erratic drug addict.

> a fantastic and hilarious job of portraying holmes as an erratic drug addict.

Except in Conan Doyle's books, Holmes was a user of cocaine, not an addict.

This desire to portray Holmes as a drug addict says far more about our own times.

  • Regardless of if we consider Holmes a drug addict, abuser or merely a controlled user, it is clear from the stories that Watson was very concerned as both a Friend and Medical expert, that Holmes is damaging his mental faculties

  • Where do you draw the line between user and addict?

    He was definitely not holding together his life by any traditional measure.

Britain was a very repressed culture at the time and for a long time after this.

An Englishman’s proverbial “stiff upper lip” came to be a cliche for a reason.

“Boarding school syndrome” would be the term coined for the emotional damage that was an educational ideal for a long while.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_school#Psychological_...

  • Yet the UK was most successful when led by people from that system.

    • Only if you think a large empire is the epitome of success.

      People have a tendency to look at the cruelest warriors of history and think that is success. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar or Napoleon are not something to emulate. They were successful by causing horrific pain to a lot of people.

      3 replies →

    • Was?

      The old boys network and class still plays a big role in UK politics. I'm convinced that the behaviour of Boris Johnson and even Starmer is incomprehensible without that unspoken element.

      Is it a bad thing? perhaps. Is it a recipe for disaster? I would say the historical evidence is pretty clear that no, not really. It worth pointing out that the US where class is much less important is more successful.

      In my head Holmes is descended from minor nobility while Watson is solidly upper middle class.

      Now, Labours envy based attacks on the private schools that gave them all their advantages in life helps nobody. It won't matter to rich kids and is just a barrier to success for middle class kids. When you consider the quality of state education, at least there should be some educated people to run the country, even if it's a bad system.

      Ot but hogwarts is a great parody of the British boarding school system. A drafty, dangerous castle full of dangerous animals, homicidal, abusive and incompetent teachers, serious injuries are a fact of life and complacent staff. Add in the most incompetent and negligent headmaster in all literature, who hardly does anything throughout the series and thinks that soul sucking demons are an acceptable security measure to protect his students and runs the school as his personal domain. Throw in class based bullying in the student body and you have everything. I always found it striking that the most hatable character in the series is a school inspector (Umbridge).

      6 replies →

Subtle, but the very last line of 1939's "Hounds of the Baskervilles" is "Oh, Watson - the needle!".