Interesting Sherlock Statistics

Skip to: New Posts  Last Post
Posted by nakahara
July 25, 2015 7:23 pm
#1

A Guardian made a nice article, consisting of funny and interesting (canon) Sherlock statistics:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/gallery/2015/jun/29/sherlock-holmes-examining-the-evidence-in-charts?CMP=twt_gu&CMP=twt_gu

 


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 
Posted by Whisky
July 25, 2015 8:45 pm
#2

It's nice!
the Baker Street layout is cool I'm sure BBCJohn is happy the chemicals aren't in the living room :D

Ha, I like the "adapted for TV" chart

the public property chart is also interesting, because it shows that mostly the readers/viewers and adaptation formed the "iconic" appearance

"which story to read first" is also fun :D - on that note, which one would you recommend to read first?
 

Last edited by Whisky (July 25, 2015 8:48 pm)


_____________________________________________________________

"It is what it is."

 
Posted by nakahara
July 25, 2015 8:50 pm
#3

Hmmm... "The Speckled Band" or "The Devil´s Foot". Both were thrilling and scary. 


-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

 
Posted by Whisky
July 25, 2015 8:53 pm
#4

Oh yes, the speckled band!
My first story was the Hounds, and it still worked :D

Last edited by Whisky (July 25, 2015 8:57 pm)


_____________________________________________________________

"It is what it is."

 
Posted by Yitzock
July 25, 2015 11:01 pm
#5

Intersting ones about the characters' appearances.  I never would have thought that Mrs. Hudson appears more often than Lestrade (although I supose they are fairly close) and then after that there are not many appearances.  Locations are also very intersting.  I couldn't help but laugh at the repeated uses of the same three words to describe the cases. How unoriginal, Doyle!
Interesting how the first Holmes story I read, The Sign of the Four, is not mentioned in the Venn diagram. Nobody recommends it to be read first. Hmm...and yet it introduces the drug use and Mary Morstan.



Clueing for looks.
 
Posted by DramaQueen
July 25, 2017 7:06 pm
#6



Look at this funny precious thing! It is census of England and Wales 1911.

The head of the family is "single", the housekeeper Mrs. Holmes is but married and has four children, among them Sherlock, 14 years of age  and Mycroft, 10 years old. Mummy Holmes was definitely a fan!  😉

In addition the youngest son, 2, who has two surnames - of the unmarried "head" of this family, his father, who appreciated his natural son, and of the mother, who is still married to one certain Mr. Holmes. 
One pretty wild "patchwork" family from a.D.1911 !

Last edited by DramaQueen (July 25, 2017 7:17 pm)


__________________________________________________

Men should be what they seem, 
Or those that be not, would they might seem none!



 
 
Posted by Yitzock
July 26, 2017 2:44 pm
#7

So there has been a real person who has existed named Sherlock Holmes? Ha.



Clueing for looks.
 
Posted by DramaQueen
July 26, 2017 7:35 pm
#8

Yitzock wrote:

So there has been a real person who has existed named Sherlock Holmes? Ha.

The more, one Mycroft Holmes existed as well ! 😊

But as we can see, this Mrs. Holmes definitely admired the character of Sherlock Holmes  much more than the one of Mycroft - she named her first born son after Sherlock , to be sure. Then she got a girl, Alice and with just one year gap a boy again, who got named Mycroft.

(I know one Sherlock Sirius, but he is not Holmes anyway. Poor guy. 😂)
 

Last edited by DramaQueen (July 26, 2017 7:37 pm)


__________________________________________________

Men should be what they seem, 
Or those that be not, would they might seem none!



 
 
Posted by Yitzock
July 26, 2017 7:39 pm
#9

Haha. Clearly must have been aware of the books. I hope that those people were liked for their names and not made fun of by others.



Clueing for looks.
 
Posted by DramaQueen
July 26, 2017 11:50 pm
#10

Yitzock wrote:

Haha. Clearly must have been aware of the books. I hope that those people were liked for their names and not made fun of by others.

I don’t think they were lampooned for their names, not in old England at least.
Sherlock as well as Mycroft were actually  surnames as we know.

Sherlock translates from Old English roots scir, meaning 'bright', and locc, meaning 'lock of hair'.

Mycroft  also comes from the Old English roots mýðe, literally meaning 'mouth of the stream', or mype, meaning 'the function of water', and croft, meaning 'an enclosed, small field'.

(But if I had a choice, I'd call my son John). 😉


__________________________________________________

Men should be what they seem, 
Or those that be not, would they might seem none!



 
 
Posted by Yitzock
July 27, 2017 2:15 pm
#11

Of course they were surnames at the time, but hopefully people who knew the books didn't make fun of them. I would have thought it cool (or whatever word they used at that time, lol) if I knew someone with the name, but not all children are nice.



Clueing for looks.
 


 
Main page
Login
Desktop format