The Case of the Belligerent Ghost:
In which Holmes trusts his Watson
I remember being annoyed at this episode the first time I watched it. I was very intrigued by the series at this point, and I loved its take on Holmes, but I didn't trust it not to present another tired iteration of a bumbling Watson. So when Watson took to considering the possibility of corporeal ghosts, I put it down as a bad sign.
Which is ironic, given how Iām about to argue that a core theme of this episode is how much Holmes has already come to rely on Watson. It seems, in fact, that I made the classic mistake of underestimating Watson, just like everyone else in the episodeāeveryone except for Holmes. He alone is in no danger of this misapprehension. In fact, it is precisely his implicit faith in Watson that proves the key to solving (and surviving) the case.
Introduction, Ep1 Pt1, Ep1 Pt2, Ep2, Ep3, Ep4
I'm not suggesting that Watson isnāt a bit silly, or even that Holmes isnāt amused by him. This series believes wholeheartedly that one can be brilliant and competent and also deeply foolish, and theyāre right and I love them for saying it. But Watson struggles to accept his foibles; indeed he is quite sensitive to mockery. In Belligerent Ghost everyone besides Holmes dismisses and mocks Watson's 'ghostly' encounter, regardless of whether he offers the true story or a more plausible fabrication, and Watson grows ever more blustery and defensive. He is more upset by the indignity of the āghostā pulling his nose than the injury of being punched. Even when first narrating his story to Holmes, he imagines Holmes to be making fun of him at a point when Holmes is too concerned for amusement (2.00).
These anxieties of Watsonās put me in mind of his ongoing performance of normality, and the question of just what heās afraid people will discover beneath it. On a meta level, I imagine them also as an echo of the Watsons that came before.
As far as Iāve been able to determine, prior to 1954 Holmes every film and tv Watson was either of the bumbling variety or was absent for most or all of the story. Among these mediums, 1854 Holmes was a pioneer in reinstating Watson as a true partner. This seems to have been the intention from the start, at least as far as actor Marion-Crawford was concernedāhe's on record as saying he was determined his Watson would not fit the mould of āthe perennial brainless bungler who provided burlesque relief."
But this endeavor is in light tension with the showās humorous, sitcom-like tone, and its love for human absurdities. For while Holmes has no shortage of his own foibles, allowing Watson a share of bumble may have run a risk of audiences projecting precedent ideas of Watson as a stupid hanger-on onto Marion-Crawfordās Watson, failing to observe his attendant strengths.
Whether that was an anxiety of the creators I havenāt the foggiest, but I like to imagine this episode as an answer to it. Because yes, Watson is afraid of being perceived as silly, as though haunted by the ghosts of his predecessors. Yes, he is perceived as silly throughout the episode, with Lestrade in particular rubbing it in, bringing all his condescension to bear in āreassuringā Watson that āwe all have our off daysā and āto err is humanā, even suggesting he hallucinated the entirety of both āghostlyā encounters. And doubtless there are audience members who watched the series stuck in the lens of Watson as the silly companion to his brilliant friend.
But so what? Heās not their partner. Itās Holmes and he who chose one another, and Holmes sees (and is entertained by) Watsonās follies, but he sees also his skills and his dependability, and loves his companionship for all parts together. And even in this episode heavy on Watsonās foibles, it is precisely this trust that allows Holmes to solve the case.
Most notablyāthe detail that first caught my attentionāwhile Watson is most insistent on his encounter with the living Higgins occurring just after eight, with each new witness comes a new attestation that Higgins did not leave work that night until nine. Watson reiterates his confidence in the time at each contradiction, but Holmes never asks if heās sure. He plays his cards close to his chest, as always, never proffering his own view. Then a perfectly clean explanation of the theft presents itself at 19.55, requiring for its acceptance only that Holmes joins all others in dismissal of Watsonās wild tale.
And yet, in the final scene Holmes at last announces the foundation on which heās built all his deductions: āI believed Dr. Watsonās story from the first.ā (23.09). Holmes rejected the clean explanation, constructing an alternate theory of a crime among the most convoluted and implausible in the show, built on the cornerstone that if Watson says it was just after eight, just after eight it was. And he is right.
Itās not only Holmesā deductions that are shaped with Watson at their center, itās his plans as well. He decides to confront the thief via breaking into the museum and committing light property damage (and as in Cunningham Heritage, I cannot overstate how much these crimes were not the only or easiest option <3), resulting in another round of getting held at gunpoint by a murderer and Watson saving the day. But when Watson asks Holmes why he is like this, Holmes replies: āOh, my dear fellow, I have sublime confidence in your ability to extricate us from any predicament in which my rashness may place usā (24.47).
One can debate the ethics, rationality, and sustainability of Holmesā approach, but you cannot contest how much he relies on his Watson.
And in light of this, the amusement Holmes can scarcely contain (though he tries) at Watsonās expense throughout the episode takes on a new aspect. Already it bore an tone of helpless endearment, far from the dismissal of Higginsā landlady or the mockery of Lestrade. Factor in the concluding scenes, andāwell, itās not only the series that loves Holmes and Watson for their brilliance and their foibles alike. They love one another in the same way. Thereās equal likelihood they will look at one another with bright affection because of the otherās endearing foolishness or out of awe and delight of their competencies. Itās an all-encompassing fondness that lends such sweetness to their relationship, and itās a fondness on full blast from Holmes this episode.
With Holmes, Watsonās strengths will be seen and valued. But his weakness and his oddities are safe, too. Mad stories are welcome in Baker Streetāmad people all the more so.
My Story
āI love when I can't for the life of me figure out how to do a thing I very much did do in the past.
Anyway, I can't figure out how I embedded the banner linking to a specific fic chapter last time, but here's Chapter 4.
Highlights
I do love the opening scene of this episode. Watson is the more natural caretaker of the two, and I love the moments when we get the reversal of Holmes caring for Watson with a slightly clumsy earnestness (x)
Shout-out to Holmes' first question once he sees Watson's black eye being to demand who struck him. Honorable mention to his pouty Angry face the second time he asks:
I get the impression Holmes is defaulting to his usual method of helping peopleāsolving a case for them. He gets lucky and gets to stay in his comfort zone since there is a case, but like. What was he gonna do if there wasn't. If Watson had answered this demand of who dared hurt him with 'that wanker Duke Cavendish' what was step two. Punch him back? Do mean deductions at him.
5.35: We get the Beryl Cornet hat deduction (heavily adapted for the episode)! Itās the only canon reference I caught, though I may well have missed others. I always love when the hat deduction appearsāBeryl Cornet was the first Holmes story I read, and I distinctly remember thinking: a). hmm, this whole deduction thing is pretty fun. b). deducing the guy is smart because he has a big head is stupid though lol. c). curious. this dude letting criminals go free because it's Christmas doesn't seem much like the cold asshole detective my Grandpa is always talking about.
6.05: Higginsā landlady does very much refer to Holmes as Watsonās āgentleman friendā (6.05)āa term that almost always implies a romantic relationship (x) š
There are multiple moments in this episode that show Holmes being disconcerted or even angry about peopleās callousness regarding Higginsā death (6.37, 9.48 - 9.58). Howard Holmes is in little danger of being mistaken for cold and callous, but I appreciate this touch as another reminder that he cares about the lives lost.
10.11: Lestrade āNow this is one case you canāt make anything queer out of!ā Just a line of dialogue Lestrade says to Holmes.
I wonder if Holmes assuming Watson is correct about the timing of the 8pm encounter despite the mountain of evidence against it is adjacent to the references throughout the show to Watson having the train timetables memorized. If there's one thing Watson knows it s the time at which things occur!
Holmesā expression in the last frame of the episode is so. Well heās reacting the rage Watsonās working up over discovering that Holmes was the one to pull his nose as the second ghost. Iāve described Holmesā expression here as āsheepishā, but thatās not really quite it? Itās part of it but. I daresay he looks a wee bit amused/delighted as well. A precursor of how he will come to respond to Watsonās anger, perhapsābut weāll return to that another day.
