The Hound of the Baskervilles Period 6 – DQ #1
PERIOD 6
Before you get to the question you have to understand that this is a discussion, and that you will be graded for “discussing” . You might be wondering, how I will grade you. Well, here’s how I’ll do it.
- Answer the Discussion Question completely (50%).
- Respond to at least one classmate’s answer (50%).
- A response to a classmate must be substantial.
- Substantial means having something to add to another’s comment:
- agreement with explanation,
- disagreement with explanation,
- add something completely new.
Here’s the question:
Why did Doyle choose Watson to narrate Hound instead of having Holmes tell the story himself? What are the benefits and drawbacks of doing it this way?
Be advised that I will not go through how to answer every question (as I did for this one below) all the time. You must get into the practice of answering every part of a question.
Now, go ahead and read the rest of this, answer the Discussion Question, and submit it.
You must be sure to answer every part of the question and responding to others’ comments. That is the catch when it comes to getting your points for discussion assignments. It is very important to really read the entire question before responding to it. If you look at this question closely, you’ll notice that there are actually two separate interrogatives, or question statements:
- Why did Doyle choose Watson to narrate Hound instead of having Holmes tell the story himself?
- Explain the reason why the author, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, chose Watson to be the narrator rather than Holmes.
- What are the benefits and drawbacks of doing it this way?
- This asks you to do two things:
- Explain the benefits of having Watson narrate the tale,
- Explain the drawbacks of having Watson narrate the tale.
- This asks you to do two things:
Now answer the Discussion Question:
Why did Doyle choose Watson to narrate Hound instead of having Holmes tell the story himself? What are the benefits and drawbacks of doing it this way?
REPLY TO NICOLE B.
i agree with what you said about Watson making it easier for the reader to understand the story. If Holmes narrated it may have bin a bit to complicated for some.
I believe that Doyle chose Watson to narrate the story because this gives the reader a chance to not only here Watson’s oppion on the outcomes of the story, but to also show Sherlock Holmes work and figure the mystery out from another point of view.
Although, as you can, there are benefits to this move by Doyle, there is a draw back. Even though you get to see the point of view of Watson, this takes away the chance to see the mystery through Sherlock Holmes’ eyes. You don’t get Holmes’ full outlook on the story, which may be slightly different than Watson’s.
I think Doyle chose Watson because Watson helps the readers understand the book better by giving a lot of details and I also think that Doyle chose Watson to give a different perspective of the story.
The benefits of having Watson narrate the story is that Watson makes the reader figure out what is going to happen next and leaving the mystery a mystery until the end of the book.
The drawbacks is that we can’t get someone else’s perspective of the book.
I agree with Dominique T. because Wtason does give the very little details and because Watson leaves the readers to question “What is going to happen next?”
You can thank http://www.sparknotes.com for the question you just enjoyed. Here is the answer that they offer to the question:
Doyle uses Watson as a narrator for two key reasons. In the first place, Watson is not as intuitive as Sherlock Holmes. In this sense, he allows the reader to join him as he attempts to live up to the master’s standards. By contrast, if Sherlock Holmes were telling the story, we would have little opportunity to solve the mystery ourselves: witness, for example, Holmes’ various and sundry revelations of the truth, which preclude our participation by effectively beating us to the punch.
The second reason Doyle uses Watson as a narrator is that it allows for the pace he is looking for. Even if Holmes’ character can give us a chance now and then by keeping his conclusions to himself, he is still too quick a thinker to take on the onerous task of relating all the facts in detail. Only a slow-witted lackey like Watson is fit for the job. When Holmes’ character does appear, he serves more as a catalyst for the action in the story, bringing things to a quick and exciting climax.
Any answers to the question posted after this will be not be considered for credit.
You may still enjoy discussing the topic, though. And maybe offering some suggestions for details from the text to support this answer.
Gerardo, you said, “he [Watson] is not jumping to conclusions like Holmes was doing at the beginning of the story.”
—-First, I have to say that I would not say that any of the characters “jumped” to conclusions about the cane. Both Watson and Holmes worked their threories up steadily. Neither of their predications were “jumped” to.
—-Second, Homles allowed Watson to formulate his predication about who exactly the cane belonged to and where he came from. Watson was wrong in his conclusion about the cane. Then Holmes carefully formulated his conclusion. Holmes was right.
Gerardo, you said, “Holmes himself says that Watson describes and makes people understand better than him”
—-Homes said that Watson has a gift for helping people understand things, or see things they wouldn’t see on their own. Holmes does not say that Watson is better than Holmes at anything necessarily.
I think that Dolye chose Watson to narrate the story becasue then we could see his side of the story instead mostly Holmes’s side.
BENIFITS- we get to see two sides of the mystery and that we also get two perspectives of the story also.
DRAWBACKS- Its mostly Holmes and other characters that are talking in the novel and not so much of Watson’s words.
REPLY TO NAGHMA-
Naghma i totally agree with you because its true if we only read Holmes’s side then we would know alittle too much about the mystery.
I think Doyle chose Watson to narrarate Hound instead of having Holmes do it himself because he wanted the readers to get a different point of view. The benefits of this would be:
Watson breaks things down, so that the book is easier to understand. You kind of get the oversight of things.
the drawbacks are:
You don’t always get to read Holmes thoughts.
I agree with Jessica because I think that if Holmes was telling the story, he would feel too close us.
I agree with Dominique T. because i feel like Watson does make the reader realize litle things that the reader might not notice at first. I also agree with her because Watson is not the main caracter, and it’s very intreasting to hear the story for a diffrent pint of view.
Doyle choose Watson to narrate Hound instead of having Holmes tell the story himself because Watson learns, and figures out things slowly, unlike Hound who figures out things right away. For instants, if Hound was the narrater then he would already have figured out almost everything in the book. Though Watson figures out things piece by piece not all at once like Hound.
Benefits:The benefit is that Watson breaks things down, so that it is easier to understand.He tell things piece by piece so it will make sence.
Drawbacks:The brawback is that you don’t know what somone elses piont of view is. Like for instants, Hound probbley sees the story in a diffrent view than Watson does.
I think the reason why Doyle choose Watson to narrate the story instead of Holmes is because Watson gives you piece by piece information, all Holmes gives you is the big picture. For example, when Watson saw the walking stick, he found out who it was from piece by piece. The benfit from Watson narrating the story is, it still stays a mystery.If Holmes narrated we would alreadly know from the-get-go, the story and details. And he’d only give the facts, not his opinions. That would be BORING!!!!! The drawbacks from this is we’d see Watson opinion’s and not the promblems Holmes is thinking about and trying to slove.
I so totally agree with GERARDO R. because Holmes really didn’t know anything about the story and Dr. Mortimer should and is mostly the narrator of the story. Watson is just narrating part of what Dr.Mortimer is saying word for word.