MISSION: CRITICAL (Analysis of "The Red-Headed League")

I: Dr. Watson's Role

Dr. Watson is not only Sherlock Holmes' "partner and helper," but the narrator of "The Red-Headed League" as well. As a result, we don't know what Holmes is thinking until he explains his observations and conclusions, and he only offers a complete explanation at the end of the story. Meanwhile, Holmes' cleverness as a detective is magnified by Watson's own inability to figure out much on his own. As Watson himself says,

I trust that I am not more dense than my neighbours, but I was always oppressed with a sense of my own stupidity in my dealing with Sherlock Holmes. Here I had heard what he had heard, I had seen what he had seen, and yet from his words it was evident that he saw clearly not only what had happened, but what was about to happen, while to me the whole business was still confused and grotesque.

So Watson is a good foil for Sherlock Holmes, making the detective's achievements seem all the more astounding. At the end, Watson is appreciative of Holmes' deductions, exclaiming that Holmes "reasoned it out beautifully. . . . It is so long a chain, and yet every link rings true." And whatever weaknesses we might find later in that chain, one thing is certainly true: that the most persuasive deductions appear to the listener like a long chain, in which "every link rings true."

II: "Remarkable" Wilson

Arthur Conan Doyle's "consulting detective," Sherlock Holmes, became famous for two qualities: observation and analysis. A good example of these qualities comes at the beginning of "The Red-Headed League," when he lists the "remarkable" features of Jabez Wilson:

He has performed manual labor.
He uses snuff.
He is a Freemason.
He has done a lot of writing recently.
He has been to China.

In each case, as he explains to Watson, Holmes has observed something about Wilson's physical appearance, and then deduced an explanation for it. (In each case except for the snuff, which the author may have forgotten to explain, but which stains the fingers and face of the user; and Wilson does use it later in the story).

This is pretty much the process for critical thinking--the remarkable features are claims about Wilson that Holmes is making, and the aspects of Wilson's appearance cited are the evidence to support those claims. We can also see that each of these claims is the conclusion of an argument, so that the four remaining features can be expressed like this:

Manual Labor: The right hand of a right-handed manual laborer will become larger than the left. Wilson's right hand is larger, so he is or has been a manual laborer.
Freemason: Only Freemasons wear an arc and compass breastpin. Wilson is wearing such a pin. Therefore, Wilson must be a Freemason
Writing: Doing a lot of writing will wear the cuff of a shirt. Wilson's cuff is worn, so he must have been doing a lot of writing--and recently, because shirts don't last forever.
China: The only place to receive a certain tattoo is in China, and Wilson has such a tattoo, so he must have received it in China.

Holmes' "insights" impress Watson and Wilson both, until he explains them, when Wilson admits, "I thought at first that you had done something clever, but I see that there was nothing in it after all." There is one point to be made about Holmes' logic, and another about Wilson's reply. First, for all the amazement it produces in characters and readers alike, Holmes' logic is often weak. Here, for example, there are problems with the first three claims. The first and third are simply invalid, as you yourself will recognize once you have studied deductive reasoning. The second one has a valid form, but Holmes undercuts the notion that only Freemasons wear such a pin when he mentions that wearing the pin is "rather against the strict rules" of the Freemason order. That leaves us with, "Only Freemasons wear the pin, and they are forbidden to do so."

In any case, we might wonder about the strength of Holmes' deductions, even without the more basic problems we've noted. Aren't there some men whose right hand is larger than the left, but who have not worked as a manual laborer? Might not Wilson have found that pin in the street, or inherited it from his father, and wore it simply as a decoration? Might not Wilson be wearing someone else's jacket, with a worn cuff and elbow? Might not Wilson have been tattooed in England (or in Australia or Singapore or San Jose, for that matter), but by someone who learned his or her art in China? You can probably think of many other objections to Holmes' logic--objections that do not make his conclusions invalid, but that do reduce their probability. In the end, even Holmes' strongest deduction here seems only possible, rather than likely or, as he presents it, certain.

Wilson's reply is the reaction you, too, should have to critical thinking: once you understand how it works, it seems obvious. Critical thinking won't save you from making errors--here, Sherlock Holmes is an example of that--but it will provide you with a method for evaluating and making decisions about complex issues.

III. Holmes Solves the Crime

As it is with identifying Wilson's "remarkable" features, solving this crime turns out to be mostly a case of keen observation and accurate deduction for Holmes. The "evidence"--which serves as the supporting information for deductions--is derived either from Wilson's initial story of his involvement with the Red-Headed League, or from Holmes' inspection of Saxe-Coburg Square, where Wilson is a pawnbroker. Wilson's story contains a number of odd elements--that is, things out of the ordinary--and these are the things that Holmes focuses on. After all, he tells Wilson, "the more bizarre a thing is the less mysterious it proves to be," because those extraordinary details, which make it seem bizarre in the first place, are actually clues. (This is a fundamental principle of causal reasoning.) Anyway, the points of interest in Wilson's story are:

He has an assistant, Spaulding, who willingly works for half-wages.
Spaulding frequently takes photographs and then develops them in the cellar.
Spaulding pointed out the ad for the Red-Headed League, and took Wilson to apply.
The Red-Headed League paid Wilson well for apparently ridiculous work.
The Red-Headed League suddenly dissolved.

Our consulting detective later explains the significance of the last three details:

"You see, Watson," he explained, in the early hours of the morning, as we sat over a glass of whisky and soda in Baker-street, "it was perfectly obvious from the first that the only possible object of this rather fantastic business of the advertisement of the League, and the copying of the 'Encyclopedia,' must be to get this not over-bright pawnbroker out of the way for a number of hours every day. It was a curious way of managing it, but really it would be difficult to suggest a better."

Holmes also has a good idea about why Spaulding is working so cheap and taking so many photos, but he takes Watson to visit Saxe-Coburg Square to confirm it. As things turn out, it is not the photos but the cellar where he supposedly develops them that is of importance, because Spaulding and his accomplice are tunneling from Wilson's cellar to something behind it. On inspection, Holmes lists the neighboring establishments: "the tobacconist, the little newspaper shop, the Coburg branch of the City and Suburban Bank, the Vegetarian Restaurant, and McFarlane's carriage-building depot." Obviously, the bank is the only likely destination for criminals (though the Vegetarian Restaurant sounds interesting); Holmes also tests his suspicions of Spaulding's activities by calling him to the door of the shop, confirming his expectations that the knees of his suspect's trousers will show signs of dirt.

The only question now is when the crime will take place. Holmes chooses that Saturday night for the following reasons:

Dissolution of the League means the tunnel is nearly complete.
The break-in will occur while the bank is closed (nights and Sundays).
Saturday night will provide the most time before discovery of the break-in.

Sure enough, while Holmes and the others are waiting in the bank, Spaulding (whose real name is John Clay, a very clever criminal) breaks through the floor and is captured.

Still, as we saw with Holmes' conclusions about Wilson's "remarkable" features, the consulting detectives logic is not always without its problems. The three major deductions in this case involve the League, Spaulding, and the timing. Can you think of challenges to his Holmes' conclusions for each? They need not fit the story--Holmes' advantage is that he is only a fictional character, and so his conclusions always prove correct (as long as his author wants them to), no matter how far-fetched they are--but only undermine Holmes' apparent certainty. One question we might ask, incidentally, is why wait until Saturday night to capture thieves who might have been trapped by police in the tunnel at any time previously? But the answer is simply that it is better to catch thieves red-handed, and not just red-headed.