An Analysis of Sherlock’s Personality

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Holmes’ Strategies
The Detective’s Independence and Moral Principles
Characteristics of Holmes and Watson’s Friendship
Freudism and Personality
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Sherlock Holmes is a multifaceted individual with multiple talents who has devoted his life to a career as a private detective. He analyzes countless cases, leaning on his precepts and regulations of honor that substitute paragraphs of bureaucratic decrees. In his opinion, Holmes has enabled individuals who have justifiably devoted themselves to criminality to evade sentence. Nevertheless, there were numerous cases when life was at stake, and he was oblivious to human feelings. Holmes was gripped by riddles and mysteries, noticing nothing in his path except them.

Moreover, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle copied the peculiarities of his character from the real person — Dr. Joseph Bell. His strategies and logic are not peculiar to ordinary people, and deduction is the primary tool for solving complex cases (Dwivedi 80). Sherlock Holmes is a unique character whose actions are incomprehensible to others; he is brilliant and independent, and aspects of his personality develop with each crime. The more Sherlock struggles with human interactions, the better he expresses his intelligence through an enormously practical and extensive utilization of the latest technological advances.

Holmes’ Strategies

The world’s most renowned detective assumed that the chain of life could be unraveled by solely one link and every part of the technique reflects the system. The foremost thing that distinguishes Holmes from his fellow police officers is his observation skills and profound knowledge. Sherlock might not know the obvious things, such as whether the Earth goes around the sun, but he determined all the soil types in London and could tell where a man brought certain bits of dirt on his soles.

He was able to pick out essential details in each case and interpret them accurately. It is important to note that context, general cultural assumptions, and memories of events related to the point were crucial in this process. The observation on its own did not signify anything; it gained meaning only in correlation with the situation (Dwivedi 81). Holmes desired to act alone or with his friend Watson, as other people only hindered him in solving the mystery, which is evident in The Boscombe Valley.

From the clues derived from the external environment, Holmes could conclude a person’s cognitive processes and course of reasoning. Sherlock’s ability to guess the innermost thoughts of his interlocutor by a fleeting expression, involuntary movement of a muscle, or by a look glanced like magic to those around him. Nevertheless, it is the result of his super-developed powers of observation and memory, and no one else had such opportunities. Therefore, the detective preferred solitude. There is nothing supernatural in a detailed dissection of this approach. Still, the ability to find essential details in a given context, vast knowledge in various spheres of life, a good memory, and develop logical thinking are unique abilities.

The Detective’s Independence and Moral Principles

Almost all of the detective’s actions are independent of other people’s opinions; the principal rule is to follow the law in the interest of justice. Holmes has numerous broken lives and hearts on his conscience, for he understands precisely how people’s mistakes and misdeeds can be operated against them (Nuraeni 21). Sherlock is aware of his responsibility but is willing to disregard numerous aspects and even lives (Dwivedi 81). He argues that any action must be justified in terms of morality; he is ready to commit crimes only in the eyes of the law. Nevertheless, the detective is not curious about rules, and if moral principles are not violated, then personal risks are justified. These statements are particularly evident in The Adventure of the Speckled Band, where the detective’s kindness is noticeable. However, his obsession with mysteries is intense, and occasionally all his surroundings and human lives are in danger. Holmes feels that he is a man independent of the system and acts as a thoroughly free individual.

The Baker Street man does not conform to the character of one particular personality type. He can be regarded as a logical-sensory extrovert characterized by dialectical-algorithmic thinking, rationality, reasoning, emotivism, aristocratism, dynamism, and intelligent organization of his living space. He desired to see people with equal views around him, and their absence was the reason for his grumpiness. The police officers’ lack of understanding of the proper order of investigating cases provoked conflicts, and only Watson was the man worthy of communicating with Holmes.

Characteristics of Holmes and Watson’s Friendship

Sherlock’s personality is sufficiently revealed in the interaction with Dr. Watson. The relationship between the brilliant detective and the terse doctor is cited as an example of genuine friendship. However, Sherlock Holmes is a peculiar man, and the anomalies of his personality can disturb anyone. Even Watson, though he is an army doctor and has seen much in his life. It is impossible to have a rational conversation with Holmes: the detective instantly turns any dialogue into a lecture or avoids the discussion, referring to apathy in the absence of rather complicated affairs.

Moreover, Sherlock is morbidly narcissistic — it does not occur to him to compare his intellectual, musical, or other mastery with the success of others (Nuraeni 18). Despite his difficulties, Holmes has considerable influence over Watson and alters his life and behavior. He encourages John to participate in his adventures even under the threat of death. However, Watson found it challenging to investigate on his own, and his ability to learn details developed over time. It is significant to note that Sherlock took his friend with him despite being independent, and he worried about his friend, demonstrating his personality from a different perspective.

Freudism and Personality

Freud’s third metaphor equates the analyst’s activity with the methods of Sherlock Holmes. Its essence is in an ongoing deductive rational investigation to uncover the patient’s hidden truths and forgotten “crimes”. According to Freud, the role of the psychoanalyst has evolved from that of a general in dealing with a resisting patient to that of a clever detective and the unconscious desires underlying his self-destructive decisions (Nuraeni 18). The conservative view of the person as guilty required the analyst to be an accurate moral compass, ferreting out lies and uncovering hidden truths.

Detective’s genius is the miraculous gift that conveyed worldwide fame and the tragedy of his life, which led to the activation of defense mechanisms. His intellect is throwing the lives of others out of balance (Nuraeni 20). It bursts forth, bringing chaos and confusion to an established life. The further, the more annoying are those who cannot operate with their brains. Childhood traumas likewise affect Holmes’s behavior; over time, he becomes more and more irascible. He can save a man from ruin with one word, pull him out of the bottom, but he can likewise send him into a knockout.

Conclusion

Thus, it can be concluded that Sherlock Holmes is an ambiguous personality, capable of spontaneous actions. His relationships with people are complex, and he often puts himself and his surroundings at risk without realizing the consequences. Nevertheless, Sherlock always considers moral principles, frequently comprehends what is at stake, and is willing to take responsibility for his actions. Although even Freudianism cannot explain the genius’ motivation and efforts, one thing remains constant: his ability to masterfully solve mysteries.

Works Cited

Dwivedi, Ketaki. “Converging precincts: Sociology and Sherlock Holmes.” Sociological Bulletin, vol. 67, no. 1, 2018, pp. 67-83.

Nuraeni, Cicih, and Eva Kristina Sagala. “Sociological condition of Conan Doyle and its relation to the setting of a Study in Scarlet novel.” Esensi Lingua, vol. 1, no. 1, 2019, pp. 14-24.

Click Here To Order Now!