[ SECRET POST #2594 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2594 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 094 secrets from Secret Submission Post #371.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[rubbertea]

I agree that your last three points make it sound terrible, but imo there's nothing wrong with 1. I like seeing my favourite world and/or characters through the eyes of another character, I think it can be really interesting if done well.

Also, as a side-note, I've always thought the main character was Watson, not Holmes.

[dreemyweird]

Also, as a side-note, I've always thought the main character was Watson, not Holmes.

In the Canon, you mean? But... but why? o_o I can see them as being equally "main", but Watson being markedly more important than Holmes is an idea that's quite beyond me. What's your reasoning?

[rubbertea]

Idk, I've never given it much thought. I guess it's because we see the story from his point of view?

edit: what are irregular verbs

[dreemyweird]

Yes, but the ultimate goal of his entire narrative is to describe the life and work of Sherlock Holmes. All his books have Holmes's name in their titles. Holmes takes up about 90% of the storytime. In fact, Watson rarely, if ever, speaks of his own life away from Holmes - unless it is something that has to do with a case. The information the reader gets about his married life, for example, is negligible (and it was a period of considerable importance for Watson himself). I think there would be reasons to think of Watson as THE main hero if he used all the stuff about Holmes to reach his own ends (i.e. with some kind of authorial intent in mind), but he does not - his sole intention seems to be to record his adventures with Holmes, which of course makes him an important character - A main hero, possibly - but not THE hero of the narrative.

It's not that I'd like to persuade you - that's your perception of the story - it's just that this opinion nonplusses me. I'm actually disappointed it's not some sort of elaborate headcanon :D

[rubbertea]

Ah, if you were looking an in-depth discussion then I'm sorry, I'm not familiar enough with the subject to give you that.

I agree with what you said, but I want to say that I didn't use the word hero. I said 'main character' which, to me at least, is a different thing. I've always seen Holmes as the hero since he's the focus of the stories, but for me, Watson being the narrator automatically made him the main character in my mind.

[dreemyweird]

I said 'main character' which, to me at least, is a different thing

To me, they're more or less interchangeable?? I'm curious as to what you think the difference is. [not saying it's wrong, though]

[rubbertea]

Well, for me the hero is the person who does most of the decisions and actions in the story; the central point of the story basically. The main character is simply the person who is the most present and who narrates the story if the narrator is homodiegetic, but they can be the hero or another character or even just someone who watches from the sidelines.

I'm aware that it's a completely arbitrary and personal interpretation of these words. it's also linked with what they mean in my native language, which might be different from their meaning in English.

[dreemyweird]

But how would "someone who watches from the sidelines" qualify for being the main character? Like, what are the requirements? Being important in terms of authorial intent?

I'm pretty sure that in English they mean the same - the only difference is that you can't call a secondary character "a hero". But it's an interesting distinction. What's your native language, if you don't mind me asking?

[rubbertea]

I don't know; like I said, I didn't really think this through. The main character has to be important, of course, but not necessarily to the story, if that makes sense? Like, correct me if I'm wrong but in The Great Gatsby, Nick is the main character but if he didn't exist the story would still go on. He's there mostly to describe what happens.
Yeah I guess they mean pretty much the same thing, I was just trying to find an explanation. My native language is French, for what it's worth.

[dreemyweird]

Oh, I see. Thanks for answering! I just really enjoy discussing everything literature-related, which might come off as a tad overanalysing at times.

[rubbertea]

You're welcome! And it's ok, I just didn't expect such a conversation and I was completely unprepared.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Hm, well I can see where rubbertea is coming from (sorry dreemyweird). To my thinking, if you think about/describe another person or a situation from your own perspective, it's always going to be subjective. Like those courtroom shows where they show the events from each person's perspective, and it's always different. So, except for the one story ACD wrote as Holmes writing it himself (title of which escapes my failing memory at the mo), we are only really seeing what Watson sees/through Watson's eyes, and it may not be actually what went on. Er, if you play The Game, that is. I personally don't. (Sorry, rubbertea.) IOW, we are seeing everything through Watson, or if you like, AS Watson, therefore the main character = Watson.

On the the third hand, whether or not Watson is a reliable narrator is an argument I wouldn't touch with a freaking barge-pole thank you. :)

[dreemyweird]

Nope, I totally get this. I just wouldn't say that Watson is THE main character. He's one of the two.

I have absolutely no objections to considering Watson all sorts of important - in fact, I love looking for narrative signs of how important Watson really is - I'm merely surprised somebody would not consider Holmes ~equally~ important.

[(Anonymous)]

SA

And, after reading your response to rubbertea, I wouldn't say this discounts Holmes at all. Quite contrary, as Holmes is all Watson talks about, as you point out!

Whether or not we're getting "the real Holmes" (if that's your thing) is anybody's guess, and probably way way way way way too much to put on the shoulders of a man, long-dead, who was writing serial stories for a magazine that were essentially "penny dreadfuls" a few hundred years before any of us were born. :P

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think the main character is necessarily the most important character to the plot, just the most important character to the work as a whole. Like, you could say (to reverse this example) that Long John Silver is the main character of Treasure Island even though Jim Hawkins is the intended main character.

[dreemyweird]

No, I agree with that. I just don't understand the need to have one and only one main character. I'd say that in the Sherlock Holmes stories, both Holmes and Watson are main characters; as regards Treasure Island, it is my opinion that the role of John Silver is exaggerated by the later interpretations.

I agree that in theory, a work of fiction can have a narrator so significant and a "main hero" so insignificant that the narrator would be the real main hero, but it's not the case with SH and Treasure Island (IMO).

[(Anonymous)]

It wasn't done well, and these were not the characters of canon.