A Study in Scarlet

A Study in Scarlet is one of the first mystery novels, written before the genre’s tropes were codified, and often setting the pattern for the many such stories to follow. It not only presents a case for the reader to solve alongside a capable detective, and explores the nature of deductive reasoning, which is how Holmes is able to solve cases nobody else can. After laying out the facts of the murders, the novel depicts Inspectors Gregson and Lestrade, and the newspapers struggling to make sense of them, while Holmes is reticently (though also arrogantly) confident that he has solved it. All parties interpret the case differently, highlighting the central role perspective plays in the act of interpretation.

Watson includes excerpts from three newspapers that all come to different conclusions about the perplexing details of the case, allowing Doyle to satirize the media of his day. The newspapers represent three different political perspectives, which means they all have different biases and agendas. The gossipy tabloid explores the lurid nature of the crime and casually runs through a variety of conspiracy theories, a conservative paper accuses the Liberal party of being morally permissive and thus somehow responsible, and a left-wing paper bemoans the idea that anti-socialist forces abroad may have forced the perpetrator to an act of desperation. None of these is a valid explanation; instead, all simply manipulate the facts of the murder to arrive at predetermined conclusions because their perspectives are so narrow.

A similar thing happens with Lestrade and Gregson, as their conventional police training limits their ability to tackle cases that are out of the ordinary. This is most evident when Gregson follows a lead that ends in a red herring; Charpentier could be a suspect because his anger over his sister’s sexual assault is understandable and a lot more commonplace than the reality of what happened. However, in arresting Charpentier, Gregson uses inductive reasoning to generalize from past situations and thus willfully ignores facts from the crime scene. His perspective is colored by past experience and by the need to close the case as quickly as possible.

In contrast, Holmes is positioned—both literally and figuratively—as an eccentric outsider. He has not been trained in the same way as Lestrade and Gregson, nor does he have their motivations. His deductive approach offers a completely different perspective. Holmes refuses to eliminate any possibilities unless he has found evidence to the contrary, which means he considers each case from first principles and doesn’t carry unhelpful biases. When Holmes arrives at the scene of the crime, he surprises Watson by slowly and methodically inspecting the outside of the house as well as examining the body. The information that he gathers here allows him to more effectively understand the crime scene inside and helps him avoid following the wrong clues like Gregson and Lestrade. His different perspective is further emphasized when he literally gets down on his hands and knees and uses a magnifying glass to inspect the room and body—actions that allow him to identify poison as the murder weapon because he smells it on the dead body’s lips.

Holmes’s lack of received prejudice allows him to work with the inordinately useful Baker Street Irregulars—unhoused children dismissed by most Londoners. It also prevents him from clouding his mind with unnecessary information; as he hyperbolically announces to Watson, he doesn’t know (or care) that the moon revolves around the Earth. This exaggeration demonstrates how resolutely focused he is on making himself the best detective possible, removing himself from cultural misinformation that might influence his thinking.