The Hound of the Baskervilles: Reality is Relative

Nature proves to be a prominent theme in The Hound of the Baskervilles; whether it be the naturalist beliefs of the Stapletons’ or the legends of the supernatural, the concept of what is or is not considered to be “natural” is constantly being manipulated by some party attempting to convince another of its ideologies. The line that differentiates between the improbable and the impossible is not discernible until it merely serves as an afterthought, until after all uncertainty is cleared and the case has already been solved. So then, no degree of intelligence nor prestigious profession that any character may claim gives him or her the authority to define what is or is not natural. Many, however, fall prey to this false sense of authority; as Mr. Stapleton is regarded as a “scientific man,” his opinion is often regarded as factual, thus empowering him to conceal his actions simply by dismissing any activity in the moor with some obscure, “scientific explanation.” Watson is on the receiving end of several of these after inquiring about the sound from the moor, possibly the mud settling or water rising. Watson, however, proves himself to be somewhat less accepting of the scientist’s suggestions, which results in the development of a more in depth theory involving rare birds. Stapleton is extraordinarily perceptive, because he rather immediately understands why the previous theories did not satisfy Watson: they did not possess the same quality of uncanniness as did the phenomenon they were attempting to account for. Armed with this knowledge, Stapleton constructs a theory more peculiar, more improbable, yet still possible, knowing that an explanation that is not only justifiable by facts but by the notion that “all things are possible upon the moor” as well would be one Watson would likely be far more receptive to. (p. 50) Watson, although quieted at the time by this second explanation, remains open to the idea that other possibilities may lie past where Stapleton’s conception of reality ends, thus establishing the fundamental message within the theme of nature: it’s relative. There is a motif of singularity throughout the text, whether it be used to describe a person, place, or situation, which serves to predispose the reader to this idea of nature assuming different meanings and qualities depending on the individual. Watson subtly, yet significantly, touches on this as he responds to Mrs. Stapleton’s warning that Sir Henry must not go to the moor because of the danger she perceives to be there by saying, “that is Sir Henry’s nature.” This play on words suggests that it is not simply Sir Henry’s nature as in his character that Watson is referring to, but also his personal perception of nature, as in what he deems to actually be possible in reality; Mrs. Stapleton sees apparent danger because the existence of such an animal as the hound doesn’t challenge her perception of what can occur in the natural world, but Sir Henry’s perception of nature deems the hound to be supernatural and therefore its existence impossible. The singularity of each person’s beliefs allows for differing perceptions of reality to coexist because perception is dependent on perspective, and one person’s perspective is independent from another’s, thus making nature relative. This quality is essential to the characters in the book as they interpret the Baskerville family legend, which was first written down in 1742 but had been in the Baskerville family for some time prior to that. This places the events told in the legend as having happened during the very beginning of the Enlightenment, a time period focused on the use of logic and reason to explain essentially anything previously associated with a higher power, leading to a shift away from traditional religious views. Therefore, the various characters in The Hound of the Baskervilles must be able to draw conclusions from a story that defies many of the modern conventions of reality by independently deciding which of these conventions, if any, they are willing to challenge or manipulate in order to explain the otherwise unexplainable.