I believe that if Conan Doyle had made Simpson or Brown the murderer; the story would have been boring. Making Straker the victim and the villain was very clever, it adds an interesting twist, which brings excitement to the story. If Simpson or Brown were the murderer, the story would have been very straightforward and obvious. Holmes is the traditional detective. He has a magnifying glass, eyepiece, pipe, and ‘ear-flapped travelling cap’. Most important however, is his trusty sidekick, Watson. Holmes is presented as a very competent detective.
‘Which could challenge his powers of analysis’ tells me that Holmes has a keen mind. He uses his intellectual strength to solve problems and mysteries. Holmes is very thorough when investigating a crime, ‘he made a careful study of the trampled mud’ tells me that Holmes checks absolutely everything when he is investigating. He even looks in places that no one else would think of. ‘He crawled among the ferns and bushes’ is also an example of this. Holmes is also logical. He likes to organise his thoughts. Holmes says ‘it was the first link in my chain of reasoning.
‘ The story also says that Holmes has a ‘quiet and systematic method of work. ‘ He concentrates a lot and has a very organised manner. ‘Checking off the points on the palm of his hand’ also tells me that Holmes was organised. He pieces all the clues together. We are also told that Holmes enjoys his work. He is keen to solve mysteries; he is excited by it and enjoys it. Holmes cuts straight to the point. I know this as the story talks about his ‘sharp eager face’. Although Holmes does really enjoy detective work he tries not to show it.
‘There was a gleam in his eyes and a suppressed excitement in his manner’ tells me this. He tries to hide emotions. Holmes also enjoys joking with people. When the colonel asks him who murdered John Straker he says the murderer is ‘in my company at the present moment. ‘ This implies that he thinks colonel Ross is the murderer but really he knows it is the horse. He says ‘I suppose you’d know him when you saw him’. The colonel finds this very patronising. He enjoys puzzling the colonel and making him feel uncomfortable.
We are told that Holmes is an independent person. He says ‘I follow my own methods, and tell as much or as little as I choose. ‘ He is presented as quite a private person who enjoys thinking to himself and keeping his thoughts private. ‘As he read the menace in his eyes’ tells me that Holmes can be quite threatening. The ‘I’ of the story was Watson. I think this was so that we could hear about Holmes’s thought but also hear details of his physical appearance and his reactions. Watson knows Holmes’s the best and can even begin to think the same things as him.
Watson can give views on Holmes’s easily without Holmes’s having to say anything. I think the best part of the essay was the twist at the end. It was really interesting to piece together all the clues and to eventually realise what happened. I think it was very clever to use the horse as the ‘murderer’ as I never expected the crime to turn out like this. However, I did not really enjoy the story. I found it quite boring. I feel that this is because I could not really relate to either the plot or the characters.
I found the story tiring and unexciting. The story failed to capture my imagination. I enjoyed watching the video more than reading the book, as I felt more involved with the story although I didn’t really enjoy the video either. The positive thing about the book was that I could use my imagination. Overall, I did not enjoy Silver Blaze. I do not enjoy detective stories in general and this was no exception. I would not like to read any similar stories in the future and would not really recommend this one.