Sherlock Holmes Detective "The Hound of the Baskervilles" new solution

First, the doubts about the ending of "The Hound of the Baskervilles"

"The Hound of the Baskervilles" is the famous article of "Sherlock Holmes Detective Collection", and the final account of the death of the murderer Jack is unclear, leaving a great suspense for the ending. Holmes said that he had sunk into the swamp and died was only a guess, and did not sit still, except that sir Henry's boots had been found in the swamp, and They had found no more evidence that Jack had finally been to the swamp. Conan Doyle could have given a clear account, such as Holmes, when they chased them to the swamp, they heard Jack's cries for help in the quagmire, and they wanted to arrest him too late. Or when he enters the isolated island early the next morning, Jack escapes in ambush, and in a hurry to escape, he falls into the mire. Writing like this, isn't the ending very clear? Why deliberately leave such suspense behind?

They were willing to believe that Jack had finally reached the swamp because Jack's wife, Mrs. Stapleton, said, "He had to flee there, on an island in the middle of the quagmire, there was an old tin mine, where he hid the hounds." He also made preparations there in order to hide his whereabouts. He will definitely flee there." Because she was abused by Jack, Sherlock Holmes made them believe her word for it.

But what if she's not telling the truth? She didn't have exact evidence that Jack must have fled there, and she might even have deliberately created the smoke bomb to allow Jack to escape.

In fact, if Jack finally fled to that isolated island, there was too much unreasonableness, that there was only one way to enter the island, even if, as Jack said, it was impossible for outsiders to enter, it was difficult to go in and catch him, but there was only one way out of his way, and once others knew his whereabouts, they were waiting for the rabbit there, and catching him was equivalent to catching a turtle in an urn, and he also left a living mouth that knew the location of the hiding place and the way into it- Mrs. Stapleton.

You may say that he ran away in a hurry and didn't think about it so much, but he was a very thoughtful murderer, and when he escaped, he even remembered Henry's boots that he stole, so could he have made such a mistake? There are so many places to hide on this wasteland, and the murderer Serdan hides everywhere until the police give up the search, so why should he flee to that isolated island?

We might as well guess what if Mrs. Stapleton had been a conspirator?

Some would say, too ridiculous, if she was a conspirator, why did she warn Sir Henry twice not to go near the moorland?

Mrs. Stapleton's true motives

The crux of the matter is whether Mrs. Stapleton's two warnings really concern henry.

Let's look at the second warning first (the first letter warning will be said later), because the second warning, there was an accident, she got the wrong warning object.

Let's review the process first, Watson is walking, Jack comes from behind, introduces himself, and invites Watson to his residence to introduce his sister. Just as he was about to reach his house, suddenly a moth caught his attention and made him go away, and just then Mrs. Stapleton came from the house and saw Watson (whom she thought was Henry).

Notice, here's a detail, that when Mrs. Stapleton came over, there was a hillside blocking her figure, so Watson didn't see her at first. So again, how could she have just seen Watson and them come over? Of course you could say she was also walking, it was a chance encounter. So let's look at the next situation.

Mrs. Stapleton spoke and directly warned Watson to leave. She did not know Sir Henry, and without confirming the identity of the other party, someone so cautious as she could have confirmed that "you are Sir Henry, right?" Please get out of here right away. Why not say that? And what about directly thinking that the other party is Sir Henry? For he knew that Jack would bring Sir Henry with him, and that the person who was with Jack now must be Sir Henry, and he could even suspect that she was waiting for Sir Henry's arrival on the other side of the hill.

I personally suspect that Jack's invitation was originally intended to be a preparation for Sir Henry, and when he heard that Sir Henry had returned, he planned the meeting and introduction (the purpose of course was to use Mrs. Stapleton as bait to prepare for the dinner of the later invitation). He may have planned to go to Dr. Mortimer's house first to confirm that Sir Henry had arrived, and then to invite Sir Henry to visit, but he found Watson and knew that Watson had come to protect Himin, and that his plan would be difficult to carry out without first removing these obstacles. So he changed the plan first, and asked Watson first.

Going on to say that Mrs. Stapleton, after meeting what she thought was Sir Henry, had given only the same warning as the previous anonymous letter, asking him to leave the Moorland, knowing that such a warning would not prevent him from coming to the Moor, nor revealing any more dangerous information. So I think this warning is false and that it is true to "show" concern for Sir Henry.

For sir Henry, to come to this strange place alone, it is very attractive to have a woman who cares about herself in this way. Politeness will increase distance, take the initiative to be enthusiastic and cause people to be suspicious, and warning on the grounds of caring for safety will make the other party more impressed and notice themselves.

Some people will say that you guess this way, is there any basis? Yes.

First, after Jack noticed that they were talking, Mrs. Stapleton ended the warning conversation and asked Henry (Watson) to pick an orchid and give it to her. If it is to change the content of the conversation to cover up the warning just now, there can be many topics. Why would you choose to let the other party pick an orchid and give it to you? The other party is a stranger, is this a further provocation?

Second, when Watson left Jack's house, Mrs. Stapleton was able to sneak out and intercept him. According to Jack's desire for control, in the case of doubting the conversation between them, Watson should immediately take control of Mrs. Stapleton after leaving, and inquire about the content of the conversation. Not only did he not do so, but he also let Mrs. Stapleton run out. Was this Mrs. Stapleton's own act, or was it at his behest?

Third, look at what Mrs. Stapleton said when she intercepted Watson. If she really cared about Sir Henry's safety, in such a situation, it should be for Watson to convey the warning just now again, and to reveal more dangerous information, so that Sir Henry really left here. But she asked Dr. Watson to forget the conversation just now, what does this mean? She had no intention of insisting that Sir Henry leave, and the warning she had made was only to say to Sir Henry alone. That is, she only wanted to show her concern for Sir Henry.

Fourth, after that, she had several opportunities to meet Sir Henry in person. And there was a private meeting, she did not warn Sir Henry again, revealed dangerous information, and asked Sir Henry to leave as soon as possible, is this not enough to explain the problem?

Going back to the first warning, the anonymous letter, the reader's intuition tells us who sent it when they read it? It's the enemy, why? For this letter only expresses warning, not kindness and concern. In fact, this letter did not achieve the effect of persuasion, but increased the other party's determination to go to the wasteland.

Third, the conjecture of the true facts of the case

To sum up, I think Mrs. Stapleton was Jack's collaborator, and her primary role was to lure Sir Henry into the bait and give Jack a better chance of having him alone for dinner, and then carrying out the Hound murder plan.

At the dinner scene, there is also a noteworthy plot, Watson sees Jack and Henry in the restaurant, and does not see Mrs. Stapleton, of course, we speculate from the later plot that Mrs. Stapleton has been imprisoned in the room by Jack at this time, and it can also be inferred that she was imprisoned and abused by Jack because she wanted to prevent the murder. But if that's the case, there's a question worth pondering. Jack imprisoned Mrs. Stapleton before he invited Henry, so after Henry arrived at Jack's house, without seeing Mrs. Stapleton, there was no inquiry or doubt? It was the woman he was dreaming of. Of course, you can make up a reason for Jack, such as Mrs. Stapleton is sick, resting in the room, and it is not convenient to see guests. So Henry had been here for one night, and at least a request for a visit should have been made, and if Jack had strongly refused Henry's visit, would Henry have been happy to stay here? Jack had promised before that he could try to get them to interact, which was too unreasonable. So I think Mrs. Stapleton was also present at dinner before Watson and then left halfway to rest, or maybe to do other preparations.

When Jack learns of the failure of the plot, he flees in a hurry, and decides to leave Mrs. Stapleton behind, first, when escaping, the woman's foot strength will become a burden, and second, Holmes, they will not doubt her, leaving her just enough to confuse Holmes. Her captivity in the room was a bitter ploy, and Holmes found her while they searched the house, and believed her words. Look again at the first words she said when she was rescued:

"Is he safe?" She asked, "Did he escape?" ”

It was a clever pun, and she still didn't say the name of Sir Henry she cared about, only "he", and this "he" could be Henry or Jack, depending on How Holmes answered the call.

In fact, Holmes, they also thought she was talking about Jack. Why did Holmes think so? First, if you are imprisoned in a room by an evil man, when you are rescued, you should first want to confirm the whereabouts of that evil man. Second, Holmes, like the reader, thinks that she was imprisoned by Jack before dinner, so she should not have known what had happened after her captivity. Did Sir Henry come to the appointment, did he come alone, did he get into danger, did Jack release the hounds as planned... If she doesn't know these things, then she asks "Did he escape?" "It should be Jack. Of course, it could also be that the room was not soundproofed, that she could tell by her hearing what was going on and what was going on, or that she simply assumed that Jack had been able to carry out the murder as planned.

If it was Jack she wanted to ask, it meant that she was still concerned about his safety and whether he managed to escape. It was only after Holmes that they said that he could not escape from our hands that she explained that she was asking Sir Henry.

Then she began her own accusations, and when Holmes said "where can I find him", she knew holmes that they had not yet caught Jack, so she said the most important thing

"He can only escape to one place."

The wild laughter she gave when she took Holmes to the swamp later, and the eager joy of taking them into the isolated island the next day, Watson thought was the joy she had gotten rid of Jack's control and the joy of learning that Jack had been rewarded. But in fact, she could not confirm that Jack had fallen into the mire, and her joy may also be because Holmes had succeeded in fooling her, and Jack had successfully escaped.

What does it mean that Jack was still thinking of Carrying Henry's boots when he was in a hurry to escape? Didn't want to leave evidence of stealing Henry's boots? The matter has been revealed, what does it matter if you don't keep this boot? Did he still want to destroy this evidence when he was arrested, so that he could prove that he was not a murderer? In fact, he only wanted to use the boots as a proof of where he was going, to convince Holmes that he had entered the swamp. He was probably halfway to the swamp, threw the boot there and exited. It may also be that he actually went in and hid all night, and ran out the next morning, and he had enough time.

4. Summary

Some people here may say, then you mean that Holmes's final tracking judgment of this detective case was wrong?

No, Mrs. Stapleton as a positive image, the above unreasonableness, can also be explained, met Watson is a coincidence, the warning to Sir Henry is insufficient, that is, she is carried away by love, or it can also be said that he is shaking in his feelings for Jack and Henry. Jack may end up drowning in a swamp.

I have made this new solution only to show that Mrs. Stapleton, as a negative image, also has a set of self-justifying logic, and the clues in the book can also deduce another ending. This famous passage, which some people read to the end and send out the feeling of "but so", can also be interpreted in this way. This is not to illustrate Holmes's failure, but to illustrate conan Doyle's cunning. :-D