This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
2alexa_d
...is this more like a thinking (wo)man's slash fiction?
I wish. I tracked this down at the Boston Public Library, and unfortunately it was reference, so I couldn't check it out and give it a solid read-through. But the basic purpose of the book is to catalogue and analyse any and all allusions to sexuality, romance, and marriage within the Canon.
There was one chapter on homosexuality (which was the one I read), and it was a rather pointless chapter, I thought. For one thing, the only stories he analysed for homosexual subtext were ones that had absolutely no female characters. And, like most Holmesians, he pays mere lip service to the theories that Holmes was gay and/or that he and Watson were lovers, and catagorically denies their plausibility without even addressing any of the texts that are often used to support these theories.
I can't tell you what the rest of the book is like, unfortunately. Maybe the other chapters are more worthwhile
I wish. I tracked this down at the Boston Public Library, and unfortunately it was reference, so I couldn't check it out and give it a solid read-through. But the basic purpose of the book is to catalogue and analyse any and all allusions to sexuality, romance, and marriage within the Canon.
There was one chapter on homosexuality (which was the one I read), and it was a rather pointless chapter, I thought. For one thing, the only stories he analysed for homosexual subtext were ones that had absolutely no female characters. And, like most Holmesians, he pays mere lip service to the theories that Holmes was gay and/or that he and Watson were lovers, and catagorically denies their plausibility without even addressing any of the texts that are often used to support these theories.
I can't tell you what the rest of the book is like, unfortunately. Maybe the other chapters are more worthwhile
4alexa_d
To be honest, the risk involved is one of the reasons I find the theory so appealing :)
But from what I understand (mainly from my research into Oscar Wilde and his world), most people back in the day would rather just ignore what was staring them right in the face. Only if the subject was forced, as in the case of Wilde, would anybody feel obligated to do anything. Also, in many ways, Holmes's profession would have been quite a boon--the police aren't going to be in any rush to arrest one of their greatest resources. As for blackmail, well, we did see the very special hatred Holmes has reserved for blackmailers in CHAS.
All of this, of course, becomes irrelevant if Holmes was celibate.
But from what I understand (mainly from my research into Oscar Wilde and his world), most people back in the day would rather just ignore what was staring them right in the face. Only if the subject was forced, as in the case of Wilde, would anybody feel obligated to do anything. Also, in many ways, Holmes's profession would have been quite a boon--the police aren't going to be in any rush to arrest one of their greatest resources. As for blackmail, well, we did see the very special hatred Holmes has reserved for blackmailers in CHAS.
All of this, of course, becomes irrelevant if Holmes was celibate.
Join to post
