The Hound of the Baskervilles

"The Hound of the Baskervilles," starring Basil Rathbone from 1939, starts out with Sir Charles Baskerville, running through the moor, tripping, as a dog howls. A bearded man tries to take his pocket watch, but runs. Dr. Mortimer concludes Sir Charles "was in a nervous state," "no marks on the body," and died of "heart failure." Mr. Frankland interrupts twice, saying Charles "was murdered." Watson reads a newspaper article, talking about Sir Henry coming from Canada, as heir to Charles. Holmes and Watson studied Dr. Mortimer's cane inscription and its bite marks. Dr. Mortimer reveals the hound footprints near the body and reads the legend of the Hound of Baskervilles, in which each heir has died from a dog. Mortimer tells Holmes, his dog is dead. Dr. Mortimer picks Henry. As they travel, a brick is thrown through the carriage window, saying, "As you value your life or reason, keep away from the moors." Henry tells them his new boots were stolen from his room. Holmes stops a shooter, aiming at Henry. A old boot shows up at Henry's door. Watson and Henry head to Baskerville Hall. Dr. Mortimer and Watson chase a prowler in the moors, where the bearded man throws a rock at them. Henry is saved by Beryl Stapleton while walking. Henry has dinner with his neighbors. Mr. Frankland calls Mr. Stapleton a "grave robber," as he saw him removing a skull from the moors. Mrs. Berryman holds a séance at the party and they hear howling. Beryl and Henry take a walk and he proposes to her. Watson, Beryl, and Henry are approached by a bearded salesman. Watson receives a note asking him to meet him in the moors. The salesman reveals he is Holmes. They find the bearded man dead, wearing Henry's clothes. Mrs. Barrymore reveals he was her convict brother. Holmes and Watson pretend to leave for London. Mr. Stapleton throws a goodbye party for his sister and Henry. Stapleton has Henry's boot and lets out the hound. The hound attacks Henry and Holmes shoots at the dog. Holmes chases Stapleton, with Stapleton tricking Watson to leave. Holmes knocks the medication out of Henry's hand, that Stapleton has given him. Holmes reveals Stapleton found out he was the secret "next of kin" to the fortune. Stapleton runs with is gun and knocks over Watson. Holmes has the house surrounded by police to capture him.



I watched the film, "The Hound of the Baskervilles," starring Basil Rathbone from 1939. I saw the film a year ago, after I read the novel for the first time, so it was just as good the second time around. I would give the movie three out of four stars. I thought the film wrapped up the plot faster than book, which was a relief. I like how they showed us what happened, such as Charles's death, instead of just telling us the details through Watson's letters and Holmes's interviews of Laura, Mortimer, the Stapletons. and the Barrymores. I liked the addition of the Barrymore's séance at the dinner party, because I felt it gave an added creepy effect to the plot with the howling in the middle of it. The séance seemed to fit in well with the mysterious moors. The special effects in the film could have been better. My only problem with the film, was that the moors were too dark and looked like a screen, which made it impossible to identify the people constantly running through it. The moors could have used some glowing colors, from the hound and the moon, but since the movie was made in 1939, I guess that wasn't possible. The hound should have been bigger and more terrifying, like he glows in the book, while in the shadows of the creepy moor, causing someone to be scared and run away from the dog. I think making Beryl, Stapleton's actual sister, instead of his secret wife, made her romance with Henry seem more genuine. I thought the last line from the movie, after Holmes had solved the case, was pretty funny ending and a nice bonus. Holmes says, "Oh, Watson - the needle!," as he going to bed, which is typical of Holmes.



The novel, "Hound of the Baskervilles," by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle starts with Watson inspecting Dr. Mortimer's cane. Watson believes the inscription, "C.C.H." is a hunt while Holmes believes it is the hospital. Mortimer asks to touch Holmes' head, as he admires his skull. Mortimer tells them about the curse of the Baskervilles. Hugo kidnapped the Yeoman's daughter and locker her in Baskerville Hall. The daughter escaped by climbing down the ivory. Hugo gives the hounds her scent and they follow her, to where they find her dead body. Holmes dismisses the legend as a "fairy tale." Mortimer tells them of Sir Charles, who was recently found dead. He believes Charles was running from something and there were footprints of a hound near the body. Mortimer tells them Sir Henry, visiting from Canada, is arriving as the next of kin. Holmes and Watson meet them at the Northumberland Hotel. Henry receives a telegram, saying, "As you value your life or reason, keep away from the moors" and one of his brown boots was stolen. They track down the cabby who drove the thief, and the man told him, he was "Sherlock Holmes." Holmes say to Watson, "This time we have got a foeman who is worthy of our steel." Watson goes with them to Baskerville Hall. They are warned that "Selden, the Notting Hill murderer" has escaped. Watson meets Mr. Stapleton, who warns him of a bog-hole and they hear howling. Beryl Stapleton mistakes Watson for Henry and tells him to "go straight back to London, instantly." Watson begins writing letters to Holmes, recapturing the events of his stay. He tells him of meeting Mr. Frankland, who spies on the moors with his telescope, and meeting the Barrymores. Henry proposes to Beryl, with Stapleton interrupting them. Watson writes of Barrymore signaling someone with a candle and Mrs. Barrymore tells Henry and Watson, Selden is her brother. Watson discovers Charles was leaving to meet a woman named Laura Lyons, the daughter of Frankland. Watson sees Holmes in his disguise through Frankland's telescope, and Holmes reveals himself. They find Selden, dead in the moor, wearing Henry's clothes. Holmes tells Laura, Beryl is really Stapleton's wife, not his sister. Laura tells them she was engaged to Stapleton and Charles was helping her with her divorce. Stapleton is the culprit, who sends his hound after Henry and Holmes shoots the dog, killing it.



The film and novel versions of "Hound of the Baskervilles" are similar in plot, but different in the details, clues, and scenes. I thought the film wrapped up the plot in a fast manner as the book goes on and on. In the film, they begin with Sir Charles running, while the book starts with Watson inspecting Mortimer's cane. There is no coroner's meeting in the book like there is in the film. In the book, Watson plays with Dr. Mortimer's spaniel while traveling to Baskerville Hall, while in the film, Mortimer tells them his dog, who made the marks on his cane, is dead. In the book, they are warned by police about the convict, while in the film, we just see him in the moor and don't know until Holmes tells the Barrymores he is dead, that he was an escaped convict. In the book, Watson meets the Stapletons first, where as in the film, Henry meets them first. In the film, the Stapletons are really brother and sister, where as in the book they are actually husband and wife pretending to be siblings. In the film, Mr. Stapleton isn't as controlling over his sister as he is the book, and even throws Henry and Beryl a goodbye party, where as in the book, he is upset over their engagement. In the film, Beryl warns Henry of the bog-hole in the moor, where as in the book, Mr. Stapleton warns Watson of it. There is no séance or dinner parties in the book, like there is in the film. There is no mention of Laura Lyons in the film, who plays an important role in the book, as the person Charles was going to meet, the night of his death. In the film, there is no mention of Frankland's telescope, through which Watson sees Holmes in his disguise. The film has Holmes sending Watson a note, asking him to meet him in the moor.

Philosophy and Ethics

I wasn't familiar with the writings of Wallace Stegner, John Hay, or Lewis Thomas. In Wallace Stegner's introduction, little is revealed about his childhood as his introduction is only one paragraph, so that wasn't enough to get a good reading of Stegner's character. Stegner was an "English Professor and Director of the writing program" at Stanford University, which is interesting. His writing subjects were "pioneers, mountain men, and settlers" and his themes were about "Western identity," which are relatable subjects for someone who lives in Utah. Stegner wrote while asking questions "while looking at landscapes," which I'm sure is what a lot of writers do in order to have a unique experience. In Lewis Thomas' introduction, we find out he was a doctor like his dad in New York, and was the president of "The Memorial Sloane-Kettering Cancer Center," which makes a pretty impressive expert on nature and how cancer develops out of cells. Thomas won a National Book Award for his collection of essays on cells, which is an impressive accomplishment. He wrote about "the biology of cells, as well as "compassion and concern for the earth and its creatures," which were related to his career. Thomas's writings on his subjects were humorous, optimistic, taking "challenging ecological positions," and "accessible," which is good because a lot of people don't understand tough medical terminology. They call him, "one of the most innovative and important writers in the field," which is a pretty remarkable honor. In John Hay's introduction, we find out his center for writing is Cape Cod, which he first came to in 1942 "to study with poet Conrad Aiken." He wrote about "migration, global connections, landscape potential, Maine, New Hampshire, Greenland, Coast Rica, and the inner and outer environments of humans and other lives." I wondered how the other places matched up to Cape Cod.



In "Glen Canyon Submersus," Wallace Stegner writes about Glen Canyon, before they closed the dam in 1963, and it became known as Lake Powell. The Glen Canyon he remembers, was full of animals, silence, rubber rafts. The canyon which was "a great recreational resource," is now dwindling down to nothing, nature wise, thanks to human interference. Stegner is sad to see that the Lake Powell after the dam closed has no wildlife "on the main lake," and has noisy "power boats and water skiers." In "Coda: Wilderness Letter," Wallace Stegner writes a letter to David E. Pesonen about "wilderness preservation" in 1960. He quotes Charles Darwin, Sherwood Anderson, Mark Twain in his argument. He says our current way of life, cutting down trees, our machinery, and not recycling our used goods, "threatens now to become the Frankenstein that will destroy us." Stegner reveals he grew up in Montana and Utah, which wasn't mention in his introduction. In "Death in the Open" Thomas writes about "animals dead on the highway". He also talks about cells multiplication, and how they vanish "into their own progeny." He tells us elephants carry the dead carcass of a fellow elephant to a proper burial place. He puts things in perspective by saying, "there are 3 billion of us on the earth and all 3 billion must be dead, on a schedule within this lifetime." In "The Common Night," John Hay describing an experience during an evening with nature. He writes about the hatching of herring. Hay watches the gulls and heron waiting for the tide at Paine's creek one night "in the middle of May," so they could catch fish. He also saw a "ghostly green eel" in the seaweed. He also sees fisherman as he is walking back, "without much hope of a strike."



In "Glen Canyon Submersus," Wallace Stegner writes, "they have diminished [the canyon], they haven't utterly ruined it. It isn't Glen Canyon, but it is something in itself," making me glad to see there is still something worth visiting. Stegner writes about his feeling of seeing the Lake Powell as feeling, "even in my exhilaration, with the consciousness of loss. In gaining the lovely and the usable, we have given up the incomparable," arguing for no human interference of nature and how it is supposed to be left. In "Coda: Wilderness Letter," Wallace Stegner writes his main argument for nature, saying, "Something will have gone out of us as a people if we ever let the remaining wilderness be destroyed; if we permit the last virgin forests to be turned into comic books and plastic cigarette cases; if we drive the few remaining members of the wild species into zoos or to extinction; if we pollute the last clear air and dirty the last clear streams and pus our paved roads through the last of the silence, so that never again will Americans be free in their own country from the noise, the exhausts, the stinks of human and automotive waste." These sad events will destroy our humanity and our souls if we use and abuse nature until it is gone. In "Death in the Open" Thomas writes, death "is a natural marvel. All of the life of the earth dies, all of the time, in the same volume as the new life dazzles us each morning, each spring" which is his main point of his essay. In "The Common Night," John Hay asks, "Who will see more than that is his short life, with its many meetings and separations?," urging us to take some time to appreciate what nature does when we are busy.



I have never been to Lake Powell, but I know some people who have a house boat down there. I usually drive through Saint George when I am travelling down in Southern Utah. I have been to Moab, but it's been seventeen years. When I was there, I did go river rafting like Stegner did in Glen Canyon. It's always refreshing to read essays and stories about something so close to our hometowns and feel inspired to travel close to home to see what Wallace Stegner was talking about. While reading "Glen Canyon Submersus," I felt Wallace Stegner gave enough description that I could picture it, before and after the dam closed. Stegner mentions the Hole in the Rock pioneers of 1880 and I know a little about them, having just read a historical fiction book about them, called "Fire of the Covenant" by Gerald Lund. Thomas tells us in "Death in the Open," that Elephants carry the dead carcass of a fellow elephant to a proper burial place, which I thought was really interesting to have a species who takes care of their own like humans do. I used to live up by highway 89 in Layton, and one day when I got off the bus, there was a dead deer lying next to the sign. It's a pretty somber experience to have and know something that used to breathe, has ceased to exist in a short amount of time. I also realize death is a part of life, since I have had twelve family members and three friends die in the past nineteen years. I had to look up the "Alewives," because I had never heard of the type of herring before. I agree with John Hay's wanting to experience nature in the dark, can be as awarding as in the daytime.

The Crooked Man

In "The Crooked Man," Jane brings tea for Mrs. Barclay and hears her scream. The door is locked from both sides and the key was missing, so Bates comes running into the window and sees Mr. and Mrs. Barclay on the ground. Holmes and Watson meet with Major Murphy, and abruptly says to Murphy, "tell me the facts." Mr. Barclay is dead and had 2 cuts on the back of his head. Mrs. Barclay has been hospitalized for fainting. A wooden club was in the room. Major Murphy tells Holmes, Mrs. Nancy Barclay "is incapable of dreadful act." He tells them, thirty years ago, Nancy was courted by two men, but Mr. Barclay won her hand. He admits he "saw a different side to the marriage," walking in on them arguing. He also tells them Mr. Barclay suffered from depression. Holmes and Watson go the Barclay manor and interview Jane. She tells them, Nancy went out to a clothing donation and returned, clearly upset and pale. Jane saw Mr. Barclay enter the room and shut the door. She heard Nancy yell "David" twice. Holmes interviews Bates, who was frightened by Mr. Barclay's fearful face when he turned him over. Holmes deduces that the suspect entered and exit through the windows, and there were prints of creature with 4 legs. Holmes interviews Miss Morrison, who was with Nancy at the donation. Morrison recalls a man with a "crooked back" wearing "Oriental clothing", arguing with Nancy. Nancy told Morrison, he was a "former acquaintance." The man was a soldier in India, entertaining the troops with his ferret. Holmes and Watson find the man at a pub and Holmes calls him, "Henry Wood." Wood insists Barclay was killed by his "own guilty conscience." Wood tells Holmes, that he "was the one [Nancy] loved." Barclay betrayed Henry on their mission, leading him to the enemy's camp where they hung his arms from a tree. He lived as a slave, being treated like a dog for a year, and they broke every bone in his body. He escaped and came to London, "no longer wanting to kill Barclay." He saw Nancy at the event and followed her home. He sees Barclay and Nancy arguing and comes through the window. Barclay fell and hit his head, dying of shock. Watson asks who David was, and Holmes tells him it was reference to King David and Bathsheba.



In the story "The Crooked Man," by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes asks Watson to go to Aldershot with him the following day. Holmes tells Watson he is investigating the "supposed murder" of Colonel Barclay. He has met with Major Murphy, Jane the maid, and the Coachman. Murphy told Barclay couldn't stand to be away from his wife, so when she left for an evening to go to a Catholic church clothing donation, he was depressed. Mrs. Barclay returned around 9:15 pm and was upset, asking the maid to bring her tea. The coachman saw Mr. Barclay walk down the hall and enter the room where Mrs. Barclay was. The maid was surprised to hear the Barclays arguing. Jane heard the Mrs. Barclay say "David" twice. The coachman entered the room through the French windows. The staff and the police are puzzled by "the contortion of the colonel's face." Mrs. Barclay has been hospitalized for brain fever. Holmes deduces a "third person must have entered the room" after witness the fight from the street and came "through the window" with a four legged creature. He tells Watson, he interviewed Miss Morrison, who was with Mrs. Barclay at the donation. She told him Mrs. Barclay ran into a man she recognized and said, "I thought you have been dead this thirty years, Henry." They leave to talk and Morrison sees them arguing. Barclay tells her, Henry is "an old acquaintance of mine who has come down in the world." The next morning, Holmes and Watson track down Henry Wood and ask him about the case. Henry claims Mrs. Barclay is innocent and declares, "If [Barclay's] own guilty conscience had not struck him down it is likely enough that I might have had his blood upon my soul." Wood tells them his story of meeting Mrs. Barclay, declaring, "I had her heart, her father was set upon her marrying Barclay." He volunteered to go on a mission, "to warn General Neill." Barclay drew him a map to "get through rebel lines" and led him right into the enemy's hands. Henry shows Holmes his mongoose, Teddy, who was the creature with him, when he broke up the Barclay's fight. Barclay fell and hit his head, dying of "apoplexy." Watson asks who David was, and Holmes tells him it was reference to King David and Bathsheba.



The film and story versions of "The Crooked Man" are very similar in plot and theme. They both involve the "supposed murder" of Colonel Barclay, but are told in different ways through the first act. The film doesn't mention Watson having a wife, as opposed to the book opening with Watson mentioning this case occurred "a few months after my marriage." In the film, there is no visit from Holmes, but starts with the "murder" itself, which makes it more mysterious. The film is in present tense, with Watson going to interview the staff and Miss Morrison with Holmes. In the book, Holmes is narrating his research so far to Watson for the entire first half of the story, which seemed like a long monologue. In the novel, we don't see the events as they occur, as opposed to the film which actually shows the action. Holmes says "Elementary, My Dear Watson" in the film like he does in the story, but doesn't say till the closing. Mrs. Nancy Barclay seemed passive in the book, and seemed more fiery in fight scenes in the film, even though in the book we get a glimpse of her temper in the last fight. She says in the book, "You coward. What can be done now? What can be done now? Give me back my life. I will never so much as breathe the same air with you again. You coward! You coward!," which is similar but longer to what she says in the film. In the book, Holmes explains the David reference to Watson from the Bible in one paragraph. In the film, Holmes explains the David reference which takes up a five minute scene. The film expands on Henry Wood and Major Murphy's flashback with more detail, as opposed to the book which mentions them in less than a page.



I watched the film, "The Crooked Man" starring Jeremy Brett. I watched the film before reading the story, for a change, to see if I could follow it without knowing what happens in the book. I think watching the film before hand, made me notice clues in the book more accurately. They both have an impact on the other, when reading or watching. I would give the film four out of four stars, because I really enjoyed it. I thought the film was really mysterious and suspenseful, yet full of humor from Holmes. I thought this was the best adaptation of the novels we have read, because it added more storytelling to the novel, with additional scenes. I liked the film better than book because I think the film's approach to the storytelling worked better, as it was mostly in real time and not just having Holmes tell Watson about what he had done so far. I thought the acting, especially from the actor who played Henry Wood, was great. I'm beginning to favor Jeremy Brett as Holmes over Basil Rathbone, but really enjoyed Robert Downey, Jr.'s portrayal. I compare all three actors to each other when watching the films, to see how accurately they portray the Holmes of the novels. It was great to see Fiona Shaw as Miss Morrison, since I am familiar with her work as Harry's aunt in the Harry Potter series of films and the school headmaster in 3 Men and A Little Lady. I think she is a great actress and really added to her scenes. The makeup, the costuming, and the eerie lightning really brought his disabilities to light. The film showed Holmes's personality and how seriously he takes his investigations. After he interviews Murphy, he abruptly says to Murphy, "tell me the facts." When the interview is over, Holmes concludes, "What can I say? Major Murphy, you have told me *nothing*!"

From Sea to Shining Sea

I read John Steinbeck's book, "Cannery Row" for my American Literature: Modern class, so I was familiar with his writing about "the landscape of California, particularly in the farming and fishing communities of the Salinas Valley and the Carmel Peninsula." His introduction in our textbook, doesn't really give a background on his life, just telling us he "undertook a research voyage to the Gulf of Mexico with Edward F. Ricketts," which is his basis for "The Log from the Sea of Cortez." His introduction in my copy of "Cannery Row" tells us Steinbeck grew up in the same area he writes about, which makes his writing more authentic. The introduction calls Steinbeck "a ceaseless experimenter throughout his career" and he "changed courses regularly." I wasn't aware of Rachel Carson's work. Her introduction tells she was a "marine biologist" who worked "as a specialist in commercial fisheries and as a writer." Her writing "portrayed the ocean as a single complex entity," and "the harmful effects of pesticides on the health of the environment" I think it is cool that President John F. Kennedy launch a "federal investigation, which resulted in must tighter controls on the use of DDT and other toxic products" after reading her book, "Silent Spring." That shows how much power writers can have, if people who can make a difference, read their books. I wasn't aware of Loren Eiseley's work either. His introduction tells us he grew up with a "deaf and mentally unstable mother," which must have been really tough. He is mentioned as having fused "effectively," "personal and professional perspectives" his work. Eiseley grew up to be "a professor of Anthropology" and museum "curator." His outlook is "characterized by loneliness and pessimism, he find comfort in our shared condition with other animals" and "communication with nature."



In "The Log from the Sea of Cortez" by John Steinbeck, he writes about having to write a book about the California Gulf and starting a log to write the reasons for the expedition. He and Edward F. Ricketts took the expedition to "observe the distribution of invertebrates," and "to see everything our eyes would accommodate and to think what we could." He admits, "It is good to know what you are doing," making it seem like he did research on the fish they would be studying. He seemed hopeful, the both science and experience would make a "picture more complete and more accurate that either alone could produce." In "The Marginal World," Rachel Carson writes about the ocean. She writes, "the edge of the seas is a strange and beautiful place" and the shoreline is "an area of unrest" and "an ancient world." Carson talks about identity of the shoreline, belonging to two natures and worlds of the shore, "belonging now to the land, now to the sea." She describes her most memorable and "magical" place as "a pool hidden within a cave that one can visit only rarely." When she was there, she saw a Elfin starfish, who "reached down to touch its own reflection," which she described as a moment of "poignant beauty." She calls the shore at nighttime, a "different world in which the very darkness that hides the distractions of daytime brings into sharper focus the elemental realities." In "The Judgment of the Birds," Loren Eiseley writes about seeking a "natural revelation." He writes about observing birds from his window, before he goes to work and observing them while he takes nature walks. Eiseley describes a crow who usually hides to avoid "humanity," and was scared and "lost," flying in fog. Eiseley describes a raven as "bird of death," no other bird wants to mess with. He relates to the birds and their experiences, seeing himself in their actions.



In "The Log from the Sea of Cortez" by John Steinbeck, he writes a lot of reality. He says, "the design of a book is the pattern of a reality controlled and shaped by the mind of the writer." In each book, lies the truth as the writer knows it. Steinbeck writes, they were going on the expedition "to build some kind of structure in modeled imitation of observed reality," by combing scientific study with observing the beauty of the sea. He concludes that if you just record the scientific aspects, you "have recorded a reality which cannot be assailed- probably the least important reality concerning either the fish or yourself." In order to have a clearer reality, we need to record the entire picture. In "The Marginal World," Rachel Carson writes "Today a little more land may belong to the sea, tomorrow a little less. Always the edge of the sea remains an elusive and indefinable boundary," which describes the drought and the moving of land. She writes, "In this difficult world of the shore, life displays its enormous toughness and vitality by occupying almost every conceivable niche." The shore is where most humans visit the beach, and we are reminded by the power of the waves and the strength of its water. The title comes from her quote, "Looking out over the cove I felt a strong sense of the interchangeability of land and sea in this marginal world of the shore, and of the links between the life of the two." Her point is that we as a world are all connected in somehow, no matter how different we may be. In "The Judgment of the Birds," Loren Eiseley writes about the wilderness as "a commonplace of all religious thought." In each religion, they have an example of a man "seeing visions," leaving society and living "for a time in the wilderness," making it seem like the wilderness is a place for inspiration and spiritual refinement. He calls the Raven an example of "the judgment of life against death," from which his essay title comes from.



In "The Log from the Sea of Cortez" by John Steinbeck, he gives an example of a scientific recording, naming the fish with roman numerals and numbers, such as "D. XVII-15-IX." I wasn't aware this was how scientist document fish. His excitement of heading to see, is relatable and understandable. I always enjoy being out in the open sea, on either a glass bottomed boat, a catamaran. or a Cruise ship, with nothing surrounding me but water and the sun. In "The Marginal World," Rachel Carson writes about shore and its hidden and visible beauty, so reading her work reminded me to appreciate things like the shoreline at a beach. When I go to somewhere on a coast or an island, I usually visit the local beach. While I am there, I take photographs from the shore or the pier, trying to capture brilliance. I usually try to make a collage or paint a seascape based on the photographs, but can't capture it fully. I also usually take seashells home with me as a memento from the trip. In "The Judgment of the Birds," Loren Eiseley writes about birds and their habits, so reading his work reminded me to take a closer look at the birds around me. In the past couple of months, I have had bird nests on one of my spotlights on my deck and one under my tree. They also built a nest in my barbecue, which I had to get rid of and had to put aluminum foil in the side openings to keep them out of there. The deck nest belonged to Robins, who left a few days after the eggs hatched and their babies were able to fly. The tree nest belonged to Killdeer, and while the eggs were nesting and when their eggs hatched, they were very protective of their young. I couldn't even go in the backyard, without them squawking at me and trying to lead me away from their nest, by pretending to have an injured wing. I think humans protect their young in the same ways.

A River Runs Through It

I hadn't read anything by Norman Maclean before, but I had seen the movie before and knew it was based on a true story. Since I already knew what happens in the story before reading it, I basically focused on Norman's philosophies and the reasons behind sharing this particular story. In the foreword and acknowledgements sections of "A River Runs Through It" by Annie Proulx included in my copy of the book, tells us Norman Maclean was 73 when he published the story because his children requested him to "put down in writing some of the stories I had told them when they were young." The facts of his life are already included in the story, so the introduction in my book tells me nothing new. Proulx tells us Maclean wrote "A River Runs Through It" as story because he thought novels were "mostly wind." The introduction in our textbook, says, Norman was an "English Professor for more than four decades," which makes me wonder, if he shared his fishing stories with his students and why didn't they encourage him to publish them. It tells us the title came from the line, "there was no clear line between religion and fly fishing," which makes sense, seeing how Norman's philosophies apply to both subjects. I thought the title was referring to the distance between Norman and Paul's relationship as brothers. The textbook also touches on Paul being divided as person, saying "his troubled life contrasts sharply with consummate skill as a fly fisherman." In the story, Paul constantly is looking for ways out of Montana, because he is bored. If he had found something other than "fishing and hunting" to consume him, such as marriage or travel, I think he would have stayed out of fights in bars. Maclean's suggestion is that being in the river, "we achieve a grace and unity in our lives sadly at odds with our dealings with one another," as if to say nature brings us our serenity.

"A River Runs Through It" by Norman Maclean, tells us of his love for fishing and his relationship with his younger brother Paul. Maclean lived in Montana, raised by a father who was a "Presbyterian Minister and a fly fisherman," from whom Maclean got most of his philosophies. He describes Paul, as a "master" of fly fishing, and Norman likes to watch his glory at the "family" river, Big Blackfoot. When they were young, they had a fight, while their mother slipped and fail on some ice, which made it "the only time [they] ever fought." The brothers have grown apart, but fishing always brings them back together. Norman married Jessie, and joined the U.S. Forest Service, while Paul became a reporter. Norman is his "brother's keeper" having to bail Paul out of jail for fighting. Norman and Paul take Jessie's brother Neal fishing with them, but try to ditch him, which lands them in trouble with Jessie. Norman decides to go to Seeley Lake with Paul, Neal, and Old Rawhide. While Paul and Norman fish, Paul talks of leaving Montana to go to West Coast. They find Neal and Old Rawhide, naked and sunburned, on a sandbar. They blame Neal for ruining their summer, taking Neal to Jessie, and Paul kicks Old Rawhide. Norman and Paul go visit their parents in Missoula. Father talks to Norman about Paul's troubles and how in his column, he has changed his name to MacLean instead of Maclean. Norman admits, "My trouble is I don't know" Paul, and wonders how he can help him. Paul and Norman take their father fishing. Paul asks Norman to fish with him. Norman describes this day as "more perfect" moment, using Bunyan Bug flies to fish. Paul fishes upstream and catches a lot of fish. Norman and his father discuss the "words" of the river. Father throws rock at Paul to scare him while he is fishing. Norman tells us, this was the last time they saw Paul fish. Paul eerily says, "just give me three more years." Norman tells us, Paul was murdered the next May during a fight, hit by a butt of a gun and his hand was broken. Father asks Norman, if he could have helped Paul and Norman asks his father, if he could have helped Paul, in return. Norman admits "all I really know is that [Paul] was a fine fisherman."

By reading this story we can tell fishing is a big part of Maclean's identity. He says, "Although I have never pretended to be a great fisherman, it was always important to me that I was a fisherman and looked like one, especially when fishing with my brother." He wants to share this hobby with his brother, to make him have something in common with him. It's clear he admires his brother's skills and he says he lacks confidence to catch the really big fish. He says his two biggest fears are he'll "probably lose" and he is "sure to lose," which I think are normal pessimistic words people constantly tell themselves. It is through their love of fishing, Paul and Norman are "finally" able to "understand each other," because they work together to catch fish. My favorite part of the book is where Norman is visiting with his father, while Paul is fishing, and his father says, "In the part I was reading it says the Word was in the beginning, and that's right. I used to think the water was first, but if you listen carefully you will hear that the words are underneath the water." Fishing to Norman is idea of heaven, he tells fishing with his father and brother makes he feel "more perfect with every rainbow." Maclean tells us, "A river has so many things to say that it is hard to know what it says to each of us." Each of us could go sit by a river and have a different experience or recall memories from others. His last line is "I am haunted by waters," which is understandable. If I were a fishing person, I would dream about being in the river, trying to catch fish. I think also it is his way of saying, he misses fishing with his brother.


I had seen the movie version of "A River Runs Through It" some years ago, but I had never read the story before. I though the story has some very interesting philosophies about how fishing can be like a religion, even though the movie touches upon it with Robert Redford's narration. I think it is fun to watch a movie and read the book it is based on, to see if the book reveals any inner dialogue or thought process the movie didn't have. I haven't been much a fishing person, preferring to read, draw, and walk around the campground or go shopping in the towns close by. I do realize how peaceful, if not spiritual, it must be to have complete silence except for the river's rhythm. I have spent many summers camping in the Uintahs, Island Park, Jackson Hole and West Yellowstone. Growing up I have watched various family members, like my dad, who live to go fishing, being out in the rivers and lakes in little rafts or standing directly in the river. Maclean writes a lot about his home state of Montana, which is one of my favorite places in the world. It is so wonderful just to go up there and make the hour's drive from Island Park to West Yellowstone and be surrounded by pine trees, rivers, and open spaces. When I was in California in May, I saw lots of people fishing off the Newport and Huntington Beach Piers by themselves or with their kids, using bait. I wondered how many fish swim around the beams of the crowded pier. I'd bet if would be better for them to find a spacious cliff or to go find a river. The smell of all the dead fish in buckets on each side of the pier, was nauseating. Surely, there has to be a better way to fish.

The Adventure of Solitary Cyclist

I watched "Pride and Prejudice" (2005) and loved it, for what I think was my third time watching this version. Except for the Colin Firth miniseries, I have seen every adaptation of the book by Jane Austen. This version is probably my favorite and I would give this version 4 out of 4 stars. I thought the filmmakers did a really good job adapting the book, capturing the humor of the class system, with hiring great actors, choosing great costumes, and choosing breathtaking English scenery. The actors captured how stubborn yet loving Darcy and Elizabeth are, how crazy Mrs. Bennett is, how obnoxious Lady Catherine and Caroline are, and how kind Mr. Bennett is. The only actor I wasn't impressed with, was the one who played Mr. Wickham. In other versions, he is more cynical, rather than just stoic, which I think he needs to be a little bit of both in order to capture his full personality. Maybe it is because he had only three scenes in the entire film. In the first two, he is interested in Elizabeth and somewhere between those two and the last, he becomes involved with Lydia. I felt like there was too many gaps in that jump and I felt there should have been a scene with Elizabeth confronting Wickham on his lies and his eloping with Lydia. Other than both of the proposals scenes with Darcy and Elizabeth, the scene with Elizabeth and her parents after she rejects Collins, is probably my favorite. Mr. Bennett, says to her, "An unhappy alternative is before you, Elizabeth. From this day you must be a stranger to one of your parents. Your mother will never see you again if you do not marry Mr. Collins, and I will never see you again if you do." It shows the kinship Mr. Bennett shares with Elizabeth and how they think similarly and how happy he is, even though he barely has any money to give his daughters.



In "Pride and Prejudice" (2005), we meet the Bennett family. At a ball, The family meets Mr. Darcy, Mr. Bingley, and his sister, Caroline. Jane dances with Mr. Bingley, while Darcy declines Elizabeth's invitation. Elizabeth and her friend, Charlotte hear Darcy call Liz, "barely tolerable." Jane receives an invitation from Caroline and goes on horseback in the rain. Liz visits sick Jane and has to tolerate Caroline and Darcy. Mr. Collins, who is the heir to their estate, comes to visit, hoping to marry Jane or Elizabeth. While in town, Elizabeth meets Mr. Wickham. Elizabeth runs into Darcy and there is animosity between Darcy and Wickham. Wickham claims it is because Darcy owes him money Darcy's father promised him. Both Collins and Darcy ask Elizabeth to dance at the Bingleys' ball. Darcy and Elizabeth disagree about Wickham, leading Elizabeth to hide from both of them. Liz rejects Collin's proposal, infuriating her mother, but pleasing her father. Jane receives a letter from Bingley, telling her he is in London. Jane goes to London to visit her aunt and uncle, the Gardners. Charlotte visits Elizabeth and tells her, she is going to marry Collins. Lizzie goes to visit Charlotte and Collins in their new house. Lizzie goes with the Collins to visit Lady Catherine, running into Anne, Darcy, and Colonel Fitzwilliam. Lady Catherine forces Lizzie to play the piano for everyone. During church, Colonel Fitzwilliam lets it slip to Elizabeth, that Darcy interfered with the engagement of Bingley and Jane. Elizabeth runs out into the rain and Darcy follows her, declaring his love for her and asks her to marry him. Elizabeth rejects his proposal, siding with Jane and Wickham. Darcy writes Lizzie a letter, before he leaves, telling her the truth about Wickham about how he tried to elope with Darcy's sister Georgiana in order to get her inheritance. Lizzie and Jane both return home. Lizzie visits the Gardners, and they go to Pemberley. While at Pemberley, Liz runs into Darcy and Georgiana. Lizzie receives a letter from Jane, telling her Lydia has run away with Wickham. Wickham marries Lydia, after he receives money from Darcy and Mr. Bennett. Darcy and Bingley visit the Bennetts, with Bingley proposing to Jane. Lady Catherine visits Lizzie, telling her not to marry Darcy, as he is betrothed to Anne, and Liz tells her to leave. Darcy proposes to Elizabeth again and she accepts. Mr. Bennett gives them his blessing.



In "The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist" Watson warns us the case ended in a "unexpected tragedy" where they are hired by a woman named Violet Smith. Holmes figures out Violet Smith is a cyclist because of the "roughening of the side of the sole caused by the friction on the edge of the pedal" and a musician for her hands. Violet also tells them she is a music teacher for Mr. Carruthers' daughter. She met Mr. Carruthers and Mr. Woodley, when they claimed to be friends of her uncle Ralph "who went to Africa twenty five years ago," and inquired about her whereabouts in "an advertisement." She has been harassed romantically by Mr. Woodley, who "would not let [her] go until [she] kissed him" for which Mr. Carruthers beat up Woodley. Violet tells them she rides her bike on Saturday to catch the train at Farnham Station at 12:22 in to town. While she is riding, she was being followed by "a middle-aged man, with a short, dark beard." Holmes is suspicious of Carruthers and Woodley, being in cahoots. The next Saturday, Watson sets up a stakeout, watching Violet ride and the man following her, reporting his account back to Holmes. Holmes suspects a man named Williamson, but he is "an elderly man." Later, Holmes comes home with a hurt lip and forehead after sparring with Woodley at a bar and finding out Williamson "is or has been a clergyman." They receive a letter from Violet, saying she is "leaving Mr. Carruthers' employment" and caught Carruthers conspiring with Woodley. Holmes and Watson catch Carruthers in a fake beard, after Violet has been abducted on her bike ride by Woodley and taken to the bowling alley. In the bowling alley, they walk in on Violet being forced to marry Woodley, with Williamson officiating the ceremony. Carruthers shoots Woodley at the bowling alley. Carruthers and Woodley had a deal after finding out about Violet's inheritance from her uncle, as Woodley "was to marry her" and Carruthers would "have a share of the plunder." Carruthers felt bad about the deal and started to fall in love with Violet, trying to protect her from Woodley. Watsons reveals to us readers, "Violet Smith did indeed inherit a larger fortune, and is now the wife of Cyril Morton" and Williamson and Woodley are serving jail time "for abduction and assault."



When I read the book, "The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist," I didn't, at first, quite get the connection between the story and "Pride and Prejudice" and was puzzled. They both have villains who are greedy, and both have people who are atoning for their actions because of new found love. After I read it again, focusing more on the characters and themes, I believe "Pride and Prejudice" and "Solitary Cyclist" are very different stories, but both deal with the theme of greed and have characters who have similarities. Mr. Woodley is like Mr. Wickham, trying to get Violet to marry him, in order to get her inheritance, just like Mr. Wickham did to Georgiana and Lydia. Like Elizabeth is repulsed at the idea of marrying Collins, Violet is repulsed by Mr. Woodley. Like Elizabeth and Mary, Violet has musical talents. Like the Bennett sisters visiting their relatives and their friends for lengthy periods of time, Violet Smith lives in Mr. Carruthers' house teaching his daughter music. Mr. Williamson is a clergyman like Mr. Collins, but Mr. Collins was actually practicing and not a criminal. Both the film and the book included a important letter, such as one from Mr. Darcy to Elizabeth, and one from Violet to Holmes and Watson. Mr. Carruthers is like Mr. Darcy, doing something heinous at first, and trying to make up for it in the second act. Mr. Carruthers unexpectedly falls in love with Violet, while Mr. Darcy unexpectedly falls in love with Elizabeth. Overall, I think "Pride and Prejudice" has better ending and premise than "The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist." Mr. Carruthers' ending just seems sad, because we don't know what happened to him, while we do know what happened to the Bennetts. At least he wasn't charged in shooting Mr. Woodley.

Going South: The American Desert

"The Land of Little Rain" by Mary Austin describes the desert of Southern California as a land where everything struggles. She describes it as a place, "that supports no man." It has no water to spare, but "brackish and unwholesome, or maddening" springs and "lost rivers." The desert has three seasons: "unbearably hot," chilly, and then hot again. She describes the flowers as resilient, shaming us "with their cheerful adaptations to the seasonal limitations." She calls "the real struggle for existence" as being underground needing space and moisture, not taking advantage of the desert's above ground spatial potential. She mentions meeting a man named Salty Williams, and how "the land had called him" and her as well. She cautions us a visitors, saying, "the more you wish of it the more you get, and in the mean time lose much of pleasantness." "A Sand County Almanac" by Aldo Leopold is his observations of marshlands, wolves, ethics, communism, and conservation. He describes the crane's survival skills in the marshlands, being threatened by "glaciers, emperors, or pioneers" invading their land. Leopold tells us his first time, shooting wolves, and how he now regrets it, wishing he would thought, "like a mountain." He goes on to describes ethics needed for survival as being "the relation between individuals," "the relation between individuals and society," and "the golden rule." He also insists, that just because things in nature don't have "economic value," doesn't mean they are any less important. "Love in the Desert" by Joseph Wood Krutch is about the mating habits of plants and animals in nature. He writes how flowers and apes exposing their sex organs to brag when they are in heat and how other species cover them. He explains that each species lives on, in difficult decisions, surviving to bring "prosperity." Though he covers the mating habits of several species, it is the tarantula's way of life that is the most intriguing. He says, the tarantula is "one of those creatures in whom love seems to bring out the worst," because the male shortly dies, often being senile, after procreating. Krutch also writes about sex in the human world and the eyes of the animals, as having a different view.



I had never heard of any of these three authors before reading their essays, but all three has very interesting lives. Mary Austin's introduction tells us about her impressive resume as being, "a novelist, a poet, and a essayist; a student of Indian culture, an advocate of native peoples, and a feminist; a pioneer author in the areas of science fiction and the nature writing of the Southwest." She is also a writer of timeless subjects, appealing to the "challenges of our own day." Aldo Leopold's introduction tells us his essay, "A Sand County Almanac" was published after his death from "fighting a fire" which is interesting because he writes about fire destroying the marshes in his essay and how he doesn't like it. It's interesting to learn, "he gives to chickadees and pine seedlings the same attentiveness other nature writers bring to a sperm whale or a sequoia," making us believe he realizes the impact and importance of every living thing, no matter the size. Joseph Wood Krutch's introduction tells us, after he read Thoreau, Krutch moved from New York to Arizona to "concentrate" his writing on "the desert environment" instead of having "a pessimistic view of modern civilization and its discontent." He traded being a "drama critic and professor of literature" to carve a new passion for writing. I thought it was interesting how someone could be so impacted by writing, he would change his entire life and outlook. It shows how powerful writing is, and how sometimes a change in life is all we need to keep going. I can't help wonder if he told his students to read Thoreau before he left. One of the best compliments Krutch receives is, "his natural history essays, full of wit, wide-ranging allusions, and a compassion for all forms of life, made him one of the most popular and influential nature writers of his time," which compliments the influence of Thoreau as well.



In "The Land of Little Rain" by Mary Austin, she writes "the palpable sense of mystery in the desert air breeds fables, chiefly of lost treasure." Most westerns I have seen, deal with cowboys fighting Indians over gold in the desert and it is interesting as to why people would think there was treasure in a dry land. I would assume that if someone was going to bury their treasure, it would be a place they would want to visit again, such as a tropical climate. In "A Sand County Almanac" by Aldo Leopold, he writes, "Our ability to perceive quality in nature, begins, as in art, with the pretty. It expands through successive stages of beautiful to values as yet uncaptured by language." I agree that not everything in nature is beautiful, but everything has value. Leopold talks about the effect of man on the marshlands, saying, "No man raised his voice against the waste, only his nose against the smell." Leopold says, "Man and beast, plant and soil lived on and on with each other in mutual toleration, to the mutual benefit of all," which is how the world is supposed to work, with both sides sharing, instead of taking. He tells "only mountains has lived long enough to listen objectively to the howl of the wolf," making the mountains seem wise for not wanting to kill the wolves but co-exist with them, unlike human predators. In "Love in the Desert" by Joseph Wood Krutch, he writes "there is no justification for assuming, as some romantics do, that the one is actually more 'natural' than the other. In one sense nature is neither for nor against what have come to be human ideals," making us believe love is in the heart of the beholder and no one can define what exactly love is.



After reading this essays, it made me more aware of certain things, such as the desert and marshlands. I drove from Utah to California a couple of weeks ago to attend a graduation. One of the most interesting route markers is a water park on the right side of the freeway between Las Vegas and Barstow. I often question the creator's thought process in opening a water park where there is no source of water, and in the middle of nowhere. Unfortunately, the water park has been closed for years, so evidently there were people like me who didn't think it was a great spot either. After reading Mary Austen's essay, where she says, "there are many areas in the desert where drinkable water lies within a few feet of the surface" made me realize the creator's initial idea of using those hidden resources. Her essay, on the harshness of the desert, made me appreciate the drive through the desert more, as being able to see its amazing landscape, while still being in my air conditioned car, as sad as that sounds. I often wonder why people who live in Barstow, don't choose to live closer to the beaches such as Newport or San Diego. I guess Austen's defending that decision, saying the desert has just as much value as the ocean. Aldo Leopold's essay made me think more about the value of land, in terms of energy and ethics instead of monetary gain. A tree may not have monetary value, but needs to be preserved to make other little trees. Our world needs all his natural parts to keep working. Joseph Wood Krutch's essay made realize the blossoms and petals on flowers are "glorified sex organs." I guess I didn't realize that before, just concentrating on their beauty and sweet smells.

The Naval Treaty

The film," The Naval Treaty," starring Jeremy Brett, begins with a man screaming, "help me" again and again. Watson receives a letter from his school friend, Percy, asking for Holmes's help. Holmes determines it is a woman's handwriting in the letter. Holmes and Watson arrive to see Percy and meet Joseph Harrison, the brother of Percy's fiancée, Annie. Percy is recovering from a brain fever for nine weeks, with Annie nursing him back to health. Percy describes how he was given the naval treaty between England and Italy by his Uncle. After spending hours copying the document, Percy went out to get coffee and hears a bell ringing from his office. When he returned, the original treaty was gone. He tells them about the commissioner's wife sneaking out ten minutes before. They investigate the commissioner's wife, but find no evidence against her. Holmes is suspicious of both the Harrisons from the beginning, after interview both of them. He finds out Joseph has been meeting with his stock broker. Holmes and Watson go and check out Percy's office for clues. They are met by a police officer who snubs Holmes. Holmes interviews Percy's uncle about the treaty. Annie reveals Joseph is the one who is supporting her, financially. Holmes makes Percy leave for London with Watson. Holmes meets them for breakfast in London the next day, handing Percy the original treaty. He observed the Harrison siblings through the night, seeing Joseph arrive by boat and enter Percy's room through the window to appear to be a burglar, taking the original treaty he had hidden from Percy. Holmes confronts him and then lets him go. Holmes tells Percy how Joseph knew he worked late, entered into the side door, and stole the treaty in the first place, ringing the bell. Joseph concealed the treaty in chair lining in Percy's room. Holmes also clears Annie, saying she knew "nothing about her brother's criminality."



I thought the film, "The Naval Treaty" starring Jeremy Brett, followed the plot of the book very well. I would give the film 3 out of 4 stars, because there was very little difference. The quality of filmmaking seemed better since it was made in the 1990's and the director wasted no time in bringing us a conclusion of the mystery in only one hour. I wish the film had better special effects and more suspense. I also wish that they would have shown us the direct copy of the treaty, with writing and headlines on it, which they also didn't do in the book, to make it seem more like a real document. It was interesting to see the characters come to life on screen and hear the dramatic music play in the background, making the story more mysterious and creepier. Holmes's interaction with Inspector Forbes is one of my favorite parts of the film, because it capture his antagonism of the local law enforcement. Inspector Forbes says to Holmes while investigating the Foreign Office, "I know about your methods. You're ready enough to use our information, then you try and finish the case yourself and bring discredit on us" and Holmes replies, "On the contrary. In my last 53 cases, my name has appeared in only four and the police have the credit in 49. I don't blame you for not knowing this. You are young and inexperienced. But if you wish to get on in your duties, you will work with me and not against me!" This scene really shows how much of a catalyst, the law is to Holmes, and vice versa in the films and the books. This scene also shows how much the local police need Holmes and how he is aware of that fact.



The book, "The Naval Treaty" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle begins with Watson receiving a letter from his school friend, Percy "Tadpole" Phillips, asking for Holmes's help. Holmes determines it is a woman's handwriting in the letter. Holmes and Watson arrive to see Percy and meet Joseph Harrison, the brother of Percy's fiancée, Annie. Percy is recovering from a brain fever for nine weeks, with Annie nursing him back to health. Working at the Foreign Office, Percy describes how he was given the naval treaty between England and Italy by his Uncle, because he was a good worker. After spending hours copying the document, Percy went out to get coffee and hears a bell ringing from his office. When he returned, the original treaty was gone. He tells them about the commissioner's wife sneaking out ten minutes before. They investigate the commissioner's wife, but find no evidence against her. Holmes is suspicious of both the Harrisons from the beginning, after interview both of them. He finds out Joseph has been meeting with his stock broker. Holmes and Watson go and check out Percy's office for clues. They are met by a police officer who snubs Holmes. Holmes interviews Percy's uncle about the treaty. Annie reveals Joseph is the one who is supporting her, financially. Holmes makes Percy leave for London with Watson. Holmes meets them for breakfast in London the next day, with a bandaged hand, handing Percy the original treaty. He observed the Harrison siblings through the night, ordering Annie to lock Percy's room from the outside. He see Joseph enter Percy's room through the window to avoid having "to pass seven bedrooms," and taking the original treaty he had hidden from Percy. Holmes confronted him by waiting at the window, Joseph "cut" Holmes's hand with a knife and then Holmes let him go after Joseph gave him the papers. Holmes tells Percy how Joseph knew he worked late, entered into the side door, and stole the treaty in the first place, ringing the bell. Joseph concealed the treaty in a cylinder in pipes of the floor boards in Percy's room. Holmes reveals Joseph needed money because he "lost heavily in dabbling with stocks."



Both the film version starring Jeremy Brett and the book "The Naval Treaty" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had the same plot and are very similar in execution. Both versions are fast paced, but the film is only one hour, it seems faster paced than the book, spending mere seconds with Holmes doing his interviews instead long, dragged out scenes like the book. Both versions make the Harrison siblings look like the suspicious party from the beginning of Holmes's investigation, with their stoic body language and stern but concerned voices. I don't remember the film version having Holmes offer a reward for the cab "which dropped a fare at or about the door of the Foreign Office," trying to catch the thief and trace his or her whereabouts before and after the incident. I liked the map Doyle included in the book of the Foreign Office, making sure the future film version could lay out a similar scene of exact location of the Percy's office and the doors. In the book, Joseph concealed the treaty in a cylinder in pipes of the floor boards in Percy's room. In the film, Joseph concealed the treaty in the bottom of the chair's lining in Percy's room. I don't remember the rose scene at Percy's house with Holmes from the book, but in the film, where he says, " What a lovely thing a rose is. There is nothing in which deduction is so necessary as in religion. It can be built up as an exact science by the reasoner. Our highest assurance of the goodness of Providence seems to me to rest in the flowers. It is only goodness which gives extras, and so I say again we have much to hope for from the flowers." I thought that was nice scene, if it was added, to show Holmes's love for science.

John of the Mountains

I had never heard of the Water-Ouzel bird before, so I had no idea of what to expect the bird to be like and what the bird would look like. I didn't want to look the bird's picture up online, as to give Muir the benefit of describing it, before I already had any preconceived notions. I think Muir gave an accurate enough description to give me a clear idea of what the birds look like, sounds like, and their survival skills compared to other birds. From both of Muir's essays, I learned about different types of birds and trees, how they survive and how they grow, from his many comparisons to others. I think I pretty much knew what a windstorm was like, but I had never been in the forest during one, just in my house or walking around town. I have been through some strong windstorms at night in East Layton, when the wind has blown back down the mountain. While I was indoors during the storm, the wind tore siding off the house, breaking trees which landed on my awning of my deck, destroying fences, and throwing my trampoline at the house. I wouldn't have thought to go outside at the time, so I believe Muir was pretty brave. I have been outdoors during some winter windstorms during the day as of lately, with leaves smacking into me, my umbrella ripping, and freezing wind chills. I knew the wind blows the trees and has a melody, but I wouldn't have guess to study each tree species to see if there was any differences in how the trees react to the wind. I believe Muir is trying to tell us to use all our senses when we are in nature, to have a complete experience and to tell us not to take the nature around us for granted, as there are wonders we still have to find in this world.



"A Wind-Storm in the Forests" describes John Muir's experiences with walking through a forest during a windstorm. He calls the wind "universal," touching everything and anything, making sure, "no one is forgotten." He describes the Juniper and Dwarf pines trees as the only two "that are never blown down," insinuating they have the strongest wind resistance. He recalls exploring Mount Shasta, where he saw "thousands of pines" knocked down and was in awe of the wind's power. He calls the trees' movement "exciting," as if he expects to see a powerful musician's concert. The storm he focuses most of essay on, is one he experienced in December 1874 in the "valleys of the Yuba River." Instead of ducking inside for cover and watching out the window, he fully embraced the storm first hand, heading into the woods "to enjoy it." He describes the "stream of summery fragrance" of the wind and trees, the touch of the wind, his sight and the light of reflection, and the melody he hears. Muir says, "Nature has always something rare to show us," believing it is more "dangerous" to be indoors during a storm instead of outside. He believes everything in nature has a language, and during a storm we hear them trying to communicate to the fullest. "The Water-Ouzel" is his study of the songbird and his survival skills. The birds are not the strongest physically, but have street smarts in order to survive. He calls the birds, "joyous and lovable," indicating they are his favorite among the birds he has studied. He compares them to Robins, Sparrows, Woodpeckers, and the Gray Eagle. He describes The Water-Ouzel's song as "sweet and tender," singing "in chorus with the streams." Muir tells us the Ouzel eats "water insects," their favorite being the "larvae of mosquitos." Although is called a "Water" Ouzel, they hardly swim "more than a few yards" and do not have web feet, preferring to fly.



This introduction to John Muir's two essays tells us he hated editing his stories, believing it is "slaughtering gloriousness." As a typical writer, he probably thought every word he wrote and every stream of consciousness was a masterpiece, just waiting to be appreciated. Having written a few things over the years, it is always disheartening to sit and change what we have worked on. I wondered what exactly he received as criticism from his publishers. The narrator mentions he is now getting the "critical esteem" and "admiration" he deserves. We are told his works not only describe a knowledge of sciences such as glaciology and geology, but a knowledge of describing things artistically as well, making him seem like an expert at pretty much everything in his field. He probably studied how things worked and how things formed, for a better understanding of what he was seeing, which helped him describe their physicality in his writings clearer. Muir explored "wild places from Alaska to South America," but Yosemite Valley was "his classic landmark," making me wonder if it was just because he spent so much time there, that he was able to study the Sierra to the fullest of his capabilities and favored it. I'm sure every time he went climbing, he looked for new experiences, paths, and opportunities, leaving no stone or tree unstudied. He certainly had enough experience, from observing nature and understanding of why nature needs to be protected from commercialism, to form the Sierra Club. Like every nature lover, Muir was disheartened to see "commercial interests" appear and taint his favorite place, with their construction and settlements threatening the beautiful lands and creatures he enjoyed so much. The narrator compared to him to contemporary Edward Abbey, who I am unfamiliar with, but it seems like a huge compliment to Abbey.



In "A Wind-Storm in the Forests," Muir writes, "The mountain winds are measure and bestowed with love on the forests to develop their strength and beauty." I believe Muir is referring to the wind being a catalyst, which the forest must rise above and fight to become greater. He calls the wind "universal", touching everything and anything, making sure, "no one is forgotten" and everyone has the experience. Muir says, "Nature has always something rare to show us, and the danger to life and limb is hardly greater than one would experience crouching deprecatingly beneath a roof," believing it is vital for someone to take the time to explore and appreciate it, even with its most forcible events. I enjoyed the part where he climbed the Douglas Spruce and said, "never did I enjoy so noble an exhilaration of motion." I bet that was one of the most scariest and memorable moments of his lifetime. In "The Water-Ouzel" Muir writes, no bird "has cheered me so much in my lonely wanderings" through their songs. Through his writings, Muir humanizes the creatures and plants he observes. He says, "love for song-birds, with their sweet human voices, appears to be more common and unfailing that love for flowers," believing no garden or forest would be complete without birds. I enjoyed the part where the mountaineer was hunting for food for himself and his cat, Tom, coming across the water-ouzel and was ready to shoot, when the bird sang for him and melted his heart. He said, "Bless your little heart. I can't shoot you, not even for Tom." Muir almost has a friendship with birds, as they circle his head, imagining them saying "Cheer up, old friend, you seem I'm here, and all's well." They are as comforting to him, and he is to them.

The Sign of Four and The Woman in Green

I enjoyed the film, "The Woman in Green" (1945), because we as viewers get to know the victims' personalities leading up to their deaths, and we see the victim, George struggle with his amnesia. I watched it on Netflix, so the film quality was better than the Weber State video page. I also think the music and lighting for the story worked well with the fast paced plot and suspense, making it seem more dangerous, so I would give three out of four stars. They could have used better special effects during the black and white swirl screen scene where they were trying to hypnotize Watson, it didn't seem as mesmerizing as it could have been. I thought Hillary Brooke, the actress playing Lydia seemed cynical from the start and figured she was involved somehow with the villainous plot. I didn't understand how the filmmakers expected us to see she was wearing green when they knew the film would be released in black and white. I really liked Henry Daniell, the actor who played Moriarty, making him seem really creepy and dark like his character from the books is supposed to be. The casting of Daniell didn't hurt to have a villain that looked a little similar to Basil Rathbone, to make us question his motives. Having seen Basil Rathbone in several films now, I'm beginning to really enjoy him as Holmes. He is serious but whimsical. I wish they would portray Watson as younger like the did in the most recent Sherlock Holmes film, with Jude Law playing him. We don't particularly know the motive behind hypnotizing people other than Moriarty wanting to hypnotize Holmes to kill himself off. I figured Holmes was pretending to be hypnotized from the beginning, so they could have made his tasks more intense to make us question whether or not he was faking.



"The Sign of Four" is mystery about murder and treasure. This story definitely revealed more of Holmes's love for drugs and fighting clubs. Mary Morstan, under the referral of her employer Mrs. Cecil Forrester, consults Holmes on the disappearance of her father, Captain Morstan, ten years earlier. For the past six years, she has been sent "a very large and lustrous pearl" in a box. During the case, Watson falls in love with Mary, whom at first Holmes is wary of. Holmes finds a paper writing on the back, saying, "The Sign of Four- Jonathan Small, Mahomet Singh, Abdullah Khan, Dost Akbar." Major Sholto's son, Thaddeus confirms Mary's suspicions that her father is deceased. On Major's deathbed, he tells his son about Morstan's death from "a weak heart" after he had an argument with him about the treasure. Sholto "concealed the body" with the Agra treasure at Pondicherry Lodge. When Thaddeus and Bartholomew found their father's body, there was a torn sheet of paper, with the writing of "The Sign of Four" on his father's chest. The pearls were sent to Mary by Thaddeus, as compensation for the lost treasure, after his father's passing. Thaddeus Sholto tells them they must visit his brother, Bartholomew, who may know more about the treasure. When they arrive at Pondicherry Lodge, they discover Bartholomew's dead body with a thorn in his neck, locked in his room, and there is a torn paper, with the writing of "The Sign of Four." Holmes concludes one of the men has a wooden leg based on the prints and the two suspects must have come in through "the hole in the roof." Holmes has Watson borrow a dog named Toby to track down the two suspects. Toby leads them to two trail, going down the wrong path at first, and the other path leads them to a boatyard. Holmes and Watson track down the missing boat, the Aurora and find Jonathan Small onboard. Watson delivers the box containing the treasure, and when they open it, the box is empty. Watson is relieved the "treasure is lost" so that he can marry Mary. Jonathan Small tells Holmes the story of how he lost his leg to a crocodile, how the Sign of the Four were to share the treasure, and how Tonga killed Bartholomew with a poisoned blow dart. Holmes reveals his reward for the case is his remaining "cocaine bottle."



"The Woman in Green" (1945) is about a murder spree, "like Jack the Ripper." By the time Holmes is put on the case, there have been four women killed, with their right forefinger cut off. Holmes and Watson sit in a restaurant at the bar, watching Sir George Fenwick and Lydia enjoying their dinner. Lydia's maid lets George and Lydia into Lydia's house and brings them a drink while they sit on the couch. Holmes and Watson investigate the room of the latest victim, trying to connect the victims through a clue. A detective arrives to tell Holmes there has been another murder. George wakes up in a strange bed, checking his wallet and looks in the mirror. He hears a newspaper seller telling people about the murder on the street below. He picks his top hat off the dresser and leaves the room. Lydia is visited by the man, telling her his story of not remembering what happened after he left the night before. Professor Moriarty gives George back his papers, he dropped while he was holding a knife during the night. Holmes and Watson are visited by Maude, George's daughter, who is concerned over her father's behavior and brings them a human finger she found. Holmes and Watson witness Maude being followed by a man in a cab when she arrives. Maude takes them to see her father, but there is no answer at his door. They find George's body on the ground with a bullet wound. Holmes concludes the suspect wanted George's right hand print, and in the right hand, Holmes finds a matchbook from Pembroke House. Holmes believes George never killed any of the women and was being blackmailed, suspecting Professor Moriarty is involved in the crime, despite rumors of his death. Moriarty visits Holmes, hinting he has Watson, advising him to drop the case. Watson returns, unharmed after being visited by a knife salesman. Holmes and Watson try to find a suspect named Williams, but as they open their door to leave, Williams falls through, dead. Moriarty reveals he is in cahoots with the knife salesman and Lydia. Holmes and Watson arrive at Pembroke House. A man named Dr. Angelo, with a black and white swirl on a screen, trying to hypnotize Watson, while Holmes inspects the house, catching a glimpse of Lydia. Lydia tries to hypnotizes him, drugging him for Moriarty. The knife salesman pokes Holmes with a knife to test his state. Moriarty forces Holmes to write a suicide letter and to walk on the edge of the terrace. Watson and the police rush in and Holmes reveals he was pretending to be hypnotized, by substituting the drug. Moriarty falls off the terrace after attempting to escape his arrest.



In the book and the film, the main villain is a man. In the book and the film, they both had a women coming to Holmes, worried about their fathers. In the film, the title character is one of the villains, while the main female in the book is an innocent. In the book, Thaddeus takes Holmes, Mary, and Watson to see his brother, Bartholomew, but there is no answer at his door, and he has been murdered in his room. In the film, Maude takes them to see her father, but there is no answer at his door, and George has been murdered in his room. In the film, we get to know the victims' personalities leading up to their deaths, and in the book we are given few details as to what the victims were like before their deaths. In the film, we see the victim, George struggle with his amnesia, while in the book, we only meet the Murderer. Both the film and the novel deal with Holmes and Watson investigating murders in bedrooms of big houses. In the film, a matchbook is found in George's dead hand, while in the book a paper with writing on it is found on the bodies. Professor Moriarty is not in the book. The film's plot is faster paced than the novel. The film is more suspenseful and dangerous, while the book has more subtle plot with a lot more conversation which drags on. Doyle could have use a bit more action in his novel. There is no treasure in the film and we don't particularly know the motive behind hypnotizing people other than Moriarty wanting to hypnotize Holmes to kill himself off. The book gives us the jewels as motive for murder. In both the film and the book, Holmes uses drugs or is given drugs. There is no flashback in the film as opposed to Jonathan Small's story in the book.