The Problem of 'Edwin Drood': A Study in the Methods of DickensNicoll, W. Robertson (William Robertson), Sir
General
The Problem of 'Edwin Drood': A Study in the Methods of Dickens
Nicoll, W. Robertson (William Robertson), Sir
Cathedrals in literature; Dickens, Charles, 1812-1870. Mystery of Edwin Drood; Murder in literature
There is something more attractive about this theory, and it has been
very well argued by Mr. G. F. Gadd in the _Dickensian_, vol. ii. p. 13.
Mr. Gadd uses the argument ‘with a second look of some interest,’ as
showing Datchery’s ignorance of Cloisterham. He quotes Tartar’s phrase
‘being an idle man,’ as corresponding with the ‘idle buffer living on his
means.’ He suggests that Dickens at this point of his story avails
himself of the licence not unfrequent in fiction of temporarily
abandoning the strictly chronological order. He suggests that Tartar as
a seafaring man might know something of opium smoking, and compares the
wistful gaze directed to this beacon and beyond, to what is said about
Tartar as he and Rosa entered his chambers at Staple Inn. ‘Rosa thought
. . . that his far-seeing eyes looked as if they had been used to watch
danger afar off, and to watch it without flinching, drawing nearer and
nearer.’
But, as Dr. Jackson points out, Tartar has his duties assigned to him.
He has to watch over Neville and see him almost daily. Again, Tartar
does not know about Cloisterham and the Drood mystery what Datchery knows
and needs to know. ‘Thirdly, I doubt whether the cheery,
straightforward, simple-minded Tartar is capable of Datchery’s
versatility, subtlety, and address.’ To this I add that Tartar’s heart
is not engaged in the business as Helena’s is. Also what need is there
for his disguise? He has never been in Cloisterham, and nobody there
knows him.
* * * * *
For these reasons we conclude that Helena and no other is Datchery. I
have taken no account of the theory that Datchery is an unknown person.
An unknown person could not possess the necessary qualities of heart.
CHAPTER VIII—HOW WAS ‘EDWIN DROOD’ TO END?
How _Edwin Drood_ was to end is a problem which can only be solved to a
certain extent. We find we are left in the middle, and as much mystery
remains as fully justifies the title. We do not know the precise manner
in which the murder was accomplished. In particular, we are left
ignorant as to the way in which the crime is to be brought home to the
victim. We cannot define the relations of the opium woman to Drood and
Jasper and the Landlesses. We do not know the history of Jasper’s early
years. We can do no more than speculate, and the speculations must be
confined within strict limits. The first question is, whether Dickens
himself knew how he was going to extricate and complete his narrative.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account