In a recent entry I talked about Doctor Watson in his sidekick/narrator role for Sherlock Holmes. I want to point out that nowhere in that entry did I call him buffoonish, comic relief (although Holmes probably laughs on the inside whenever he withholds the solution to a mystery from his friend), or foolish in any way.
Unfortunately a lot of adaptations (*cough*NigelBruce*cough*)
felt that in order to make Holmes look brilliant on film, they had to lower
Watson’s intelligence to show a greater differentiation between the two. (Happily the latest adaptations of Watson
(played by Jude Law in theaters, Ian Hart in the latest BBC adaptations, and
Martin Freeman in the BBC update) have allowed him to actually possess some
brain cells. One can only hope that
these adaptations, and not the old cartoonish stereotype, will restore Watson’s
reputation.)
In this entry, however, I get to introduce Captain Arthur Hastings, the sidekick of Agatha
Christie’s Belgian detective, Hercule Poirot. I haven’t read all of Christie’s novels
(yet…), but I’ve noticed that Hastings’ character is the stereotype of Watson.
Oh, he’s good and kind and is the “relatable” character
compared to the finicky and precise Poirot. Hastings also gets points for having a pronounceable name. But for the most part he doesn’t contribute
much to the solution of the mystery. Often
he acts like a dumb, clumsy, but loyal and loveable puppy. Half of the time I expect Poirot to lean
forward and scratch him behind the ears.
Christie uses Hastings as the bungler of key clues, in
order to keep the mystery going without having Poirot make any mistakes
himself. Therefore, this is the kind of
scene in which poor unsuspecting Hastings tends to find himself:
There has been a
murder at a golf course. There are a ton
of suspects and they’re all related to each other and too rich to be held by
the police for questioning. One of these
suspects is the murderer. The others are
witnesses.
Innocent Witness
Lady: Oh hello, Captain. I was
hoping to find Mr. Poirot.HASTINGS: Sorry. He’s off waxing his mustachios. But perhaps I could help?
INNOCENT WITNESS LADY: HAHAHAHAHAH
HASTINGS: What’s so funny?
INNOCENT WITNESS LADY: Er…nothing. No, thank you for offering. Do you know when Mr. Poirot will be available for me to tell him this super important clue that will solve the case?
HASTINGS: Solve the case? Sounds serious. You sure you won’t tell me?
INNOCENT WITNESS LADY: No I’m good.
HASTINGS: Well then you can tell Poirot at dinner tonight
at 8:00.
INNOCENT WITNESS LADY: It’s a date!
HASTINGS: Really?
INNOCENT WITNESS LADY: Nope.
She leaves and immediately
is murdered. Shortly after Poirot shows
up.
POIROT: Well Hastings I have returned. Did anything important happen when I was away
from the main plot?
HASTINGS: Nothing I can think of. I almost got a date.
POLICEMAN: We’ve just shown up to inform you that the
Innocent Witness Lady has been found strangled!
HASTINGS: Oh! And
she knew the clue that would solve the mystery!
POIROT: Wait what? When did this happen?
HASTINGS: Oh when I tried to get a date with her, I
told you, remember? She was asking for you and she wouldn’t tell
me what she knew…
POIROT: You couldn’t have asked her to wait or
something? You just sent her to her
completely avoidable and untimely demise!
HASTINGS: My bad.
Eventually Christie must have noticed this pattern as well
and shifted to third-person limited POV for the remainder of the Poirot
mysteries. Poirot, though eccentric and
brilliant, didn’t really need Hastings’ kind heart and people skills to make up
for it, since Poirot himself showed to be empathetic to other characters—even
the murderers in some cases—and a keen interest in the personalities around
him.
As for Hastings, she married him off and sent him to
Argentina.
Those poor Argentinians….
Those poor Argentinians….
No comments:
Post a Comment