Stay in the Loop
BSR publishes on a weekly schedule, with an email newsletter every Wednesday and Thursday morning. There’s no paywall, and subscribing is always free.
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, meet Dr. Watson
"The Secret of Sherlock Holmes' at People's Light (2nd review)
Don't expect a dramatization of a Sherlock Holmes murder mystery when you attend The Secret of Sherlock Holmes. It's more unusual and more interesting. This play examines the relationship between two men who have many differences but also were the closest of friends over a long period.
As devotees of the oeuvre know, Arthur Conan Doyle killed off his creation in The Final Problem, published in 1893. After resisting public pressure for a decade, the author wrote The Adventure of the Empty House in 1903, a literal cliff-hanger that explained how Holmes had escaped death when he appeared to tumble over a waterfall. In that story, only three years had elapsed, during which Holmes was in hiding. He didn't reveal his whereabouts even to Watson.
Trust among friends
How do friends reunite after such a separation? And how do they readjust to each other? This background inspires the strong second act of The Secret of Sherlock Holmes.
When Holmes returns to London and reveals himself to Watson, the doctor is upset that his closest friend deserted him for three years. When Holmes says that he couldn't trust Watson to keep the secret that he had survived, Watson is even more perturbed by that lack of confidence.
A marvelous exchange occurs. "Aren't you glad to see me?" Holmes asks. "I'm overjoyed," Watson replies, while his face and body convey the opposite.
Bumbling assistant
A large part of the appeal of Sherlock Holmes stories lies in the reader's belief that he knows the characters and thinks of them as real people. Holmes dazzles us with the brilliance of his deductive powers. By contrast, Watson seems dull and bumbling to the point where the reader can feel superior to him— an important ingredient.
Watson became the archetype for detective stories whose the hero has a loyal but less intelligent assistant. The Secret of Sherlock Holmes challenges those stereotypes and presents a Holmes with noticeable flaws and a Watson of intellect and humor.
Holmes's flaws
Playwright Jeremy Paul astutely mines the deficiencies in Holmes's character that Dr. Watson observed in Conan Doyle's first Holmes story, A Study in Scarlet, in 1887. There Watson rated Holmes's knowledge of literature as "nothing; knowledge of philosophy— nothing; knowledge of astronomy— nothing; knowledge of politics— feeble."
These flaws were eliminated in subsequent books, movies and TV shows about Holmes, but here they are spotlighted. In this play, as in A Study in Scarlet, Holmes claims he doesn't know that the Earth revolves around the Sun, because such information is irrelevant to his work.
Holmes also is shown as insecure and sometimes depressed, albeit with flashes of theatricality. Peter DeLaurier has a difficult assignment of interpreting this new vision of Holmes, and he succeeds in doing it sympathetically.
Rathbone's insecurity
This is a far different Holmes from the famous character portrayed by Basil Rathbone, who appeared on screen as suave, erudite and unflappable. Before he assumed that role, Rathbone was a Shakespearian, then a romantic leading man and a villain on English and American stages. He was one of Hollywood's most flamboyant party-givers as well.
But the private Rathbone, like the private Holmes, was a very different fellow, as I discovered when I interviewed him in 1967. He was then 75 and about to undergo heart surgery, and I found him frightened and melancholy. Recuperating at home, he collapsed and died shortly after.
In The Secret of Sherlock Holmes, the Victorian home office on Baker Street is smartly designed by James F. Pyne Jr. That setting is fluidly transformed by Lauren Mandilian's video projections into a moving train, and to street scenes and to the waterfall where Holmes apparently dies. Stephen Novelli's direction is smoothly effective. And Watson, as vividly portrayed by Mark Lazar, emerges here as more rounded and sympathetic than in any previous play, film or TV series. ♦
To read another review by Bill Murphy, click here.
To read a response, click here.
As devotees of the oeuvre know, Arthur Conan Doyle killed off his creation in The Final Problem, published in 1893. After resisting public pressure for a decade, the author wrote The Adventure of the Empty House in 1903, a literal cliff-hanger that explained how Holmes had escaped death when he appeared to tumble over a waterfall. In that story, only three years had elapsed, during which Holmes was in hiding. He didn't reveal his whereabouts even to Watson.
Trust among friends
How do friends reunite after such a separation? And how do they readjust to each other? This background inspires the strong second act of The Secret of Sherlock Holmes.
When Holmes returns to London and reveals himself to Watson, the doctor is upset that his closest friend deserted him for three years. When Holmes says that he couldn't trust Watson to keep the secret that he had survived, Watson is even more perturbed by that lack of confidence.
A marvelous exchange occurs. "Aren't you glad to see me?" Holmes asks. "I'm overjoyed," Watson replies, while his face and body convey the opposite.
Bumbling assistant
A large part of the appeal of Sherlock Holmes stories lies in the reader's belief that he knows the characters and thinks of them as real people. Holmes dazzles us with the brilliance of his deductive powers. By contrast, Watson seems dull and bumbling to the point where the reader can feel superior to him— an important ingredient.
Watson became the archetype for detective stories whose the hero has a loyal but less intelligent assistant. The Secret of Sherlock Holmes challenges those stereotypes and presents a Holmes with noticeable flaws and a Watson of intellect and humor.
Holmes's flaws
Playwright Jeremy Paul astutely mines the deficiencies in Holmes's character that Dr. Watson observed in Conan Doyle's first Holmes story, A Study in Scarlet, in 1887. There Watson rated Holmes's knowledge of literature as "nothing; knowledge of philosophy— nothing; knowledge of astronomy— nothing; knowledge of politics— feeble."
These flaws were eliminated in subsequent books, movies and TV shows about Holmes, but here they are spotlighted. In this play, as in A Study in Scarlet, Holmes claims he doesn't know that the Earth revolves around the Sun, because such information is irrelevant to his work.
Holmes also is shown as insecure and sometimes depressed, albeit with flashes of theatricality. Peter DeLaurier has a difficult assignment of interpreting this new vision of Holmes, and he succeeds in doing it sympathetically.
Rathbone's insecurity
This is a far different Holmes from the famous character portrayed by Basil Rathbone, who appeared on screen as suave, erudite and unflappable. Before he assumed that role, Rathbone was a Shakespearian, then a romantic leading man and a villain on English and American stages. He was one of Hollywood's most flamboyant party-givers as well.
But the private Rathbone, like the private Holmes, was a very different fellow, as I discovered when I interviewed him in 1967. He was then 75 and about to undergo heart surgery, and I found him frightened and melancholy. Recuperating at home, he collapsed and died shortly after.
In The Secret of Sherlock Holmes, the Victorian home office on Baker Street is smartly designed by James F. Pyne Jr. That setting is fluidly transformed by Lauren Mandilian's video projections into a moving train, and to street scenes and to the waterfall where Holmes apparently dies. Stephen Novelli's direction is smoothly effective. And Watson, as vividly portrayed by Mark Lazar, emerges here as more rounded and sympathetic than in any previous play, film or TV series. ♦
To read another review by Bill Murphy, click here.
To read a response, click here.
What, When, Where
The Secret of Sherlock Holmes. By Jeremy Paul; Stephen Novelli directed. Through August 8, 2010 at People’s Light & Theatre Company, 39 Conestoga Road, Malvern. (610) 644-3500 or www.peopleslight.org.
Sign up for our newsletter
All of the week's new articles, all in one place. Sign up for the free weekly BSR newsletters, and don't miss a conversation.