Strand vs. Collier’s

Lord Blackhood der Kether’s

FEBRUARY 2001 Volume MMI Number Five

STRAND VS. COLLIER’S

çThe Disappearance of Lady Frances Carfax (STRAND – DEC. 1911)

The Empty House è (COLLIER’S – SEPT. 1903)

I am sure that I have in previous articles referred to my reasons behind selecting a Strand Magazine format in preference to Collier’s. For those of you who may not have read those articles, I shall explain here in greater detail.

From July 1891 to April 1902, The Strand Magazine were always the fist to publish new Sherlock Holmes material by Conan Doyle. On and off, from September 1903 until November 1924, Collier’s published the stories for an American public, roughly a month before Strand published the same story in England (From September 1926 onwards, Liberty took over Collier’s’ role of publishing Holmes material before the British release).

I’m sure every Sherlockian has heard (or at least read) the story of how Sidney Paget opened his brother [Walter’s] mail and usurped his commission by composing the illustrations in The Strand himself. I’m sure Walter would have forgiven his brother, were it not that Sid rubbed even more salt into the wound by using poor old Wally’s head as his model for Holmes (pictured right). And whom did he use for Watson? Why the late great Sir Arthur Conan Doyle himself, of course.

Unfortunately, Sir Arthur “Nit-Picker” Doyle was never very happy with SP’s depiction of Holmes; as he thought it made him look too handsome, dashing and romantic (Come on!! Can anyone honestly say they’ve been turned on by Paget’s pictures?!).

As I mentioned earlier, Sid used brother Walter as a model for Holmes in his illustrations. However, for Collier’s Magazine, artist Frederic Dorr Steele drew his image from the first actor ever to play Sherlock Holmes; William Gillette (pictured left). This was a wise move on Steele’s behalf, as Gillette was – for the American public, at least – the face of Sherlock Holmes. This was a move that gave Doyle great delight; as he himself thought Gillette perfect for the role (then again, I’m sure we’ve all heard similar stories in reference to Ellie Norwood, Arthur Wontner, etc).

Never the less, Steele continued to depict a Gillette-style Holmes in Collier’s.

Why am I talking about Strand and Collier’s? I recount these details from the early Holmesian era because there has over the years been a certain stereotypical image of Holmes, perpetuated by most of the actors who’ve ever played him. Most of these clichéd stereotypes usually involve a deerstalker, a tweed coat with Inverness cape, a large curved pipe (or a giant orange calabash), and a magnifying glass.

However, even though both sides of the Atlantic display a tendency for selling out to stereotypes in order to draw an audience, they do maintain a certain tendency to occasionally draw from their own experience of Holmes, and the commonly shared vision.

For the most part, dramatisations (except those featuring such actors as Norwood, Wontner, Edward Woodward and Jeremy Brett) tend to draw primarily from Paget’s own illustrations of the stories; yet they also feel the need to incorporate the unoriginal costumes and hackneyed expressions – such as “Elementary, my dear Watson” and “The game is afoot” – simply to draw a more general target audience who expect Holmes The Formula rather than Holmes The Character. What excludes Norwood, Wontner, Woodward and Brett (pictured right, sans Edward Woodward) from this list is their noticeably meticulous attention to the details of Paget’s illustrations.

Although others made an effort to emulate this sacred visual style (most notably Basil Rathbone, Douglas Wilmer and Ian Richardson) their producers all eventually succumbed to the popular – and often ridiculed – uniform simply to please the masses. The one other actor to have made a concerted effort to stay true to Paget and Doyle was Peter Cushing (who boasted a proud collection of the complete Strand collection of Sherlock Holmes). Unfortunately, when he at last secured the role (succeeding Wilmer in the television serial) he was criticised for being too old to play the part and his run in the series was short lived.

A Canadian funded movie in 1979 – MURDER BY DECREE – was very obviously influenced by Steele’s illustrations. Even down to the costumes and casting of Christopher Plummer (pictured left) as Holmes; in many ways, strikingly similar to Gillette in appearance. [Unfortunately, I have been unable to locate a better photograph of Plummer for the comparison with Gillette]

I have several reasons for wanting to do THE REIGN OF TERROR in Strand format. Firstly, it is because - in terms of original Holmes publications - the Strand’s is the only one I am familiar with, owing to the fact that publishers only ever seem interested in printing Strand facsimiles. So, in a sense, I suppose I could have Collier’sed it; but the lack of templates available make it difficult.

Secondly, I feel that - with the existence of the movie MURDER BY DECREE – we already have a Collier’s version. (pictured left. Looks like I do have a good example after all!) Not that it was ever official or anything, but one look at the artistic design of that movie, and there can be no doubt where the inspiration for the design originated.

The costumes (specifically of those worn by Holmes and Watson), the physical features of the actors, the more colourful and lavish style of Victorian middle class (as opposed to the more minimalist, yet still cluttered appearance in Paget’s pictures) and the more justifiable over-use of the deerstalker and curved pipe are but a few examples. To take one specific example, the dressing gown often worn by Gillette in the part (as pictured in the first two Gillette pictures and unsurprisingly used by Steele in his illustrations) was recreated to almost exact detail for MURDER BY DECREE.

Perhaps I am biased in my view, as I see all British productions essentially as Strand and all American (or Canadian – sorry guys but you are right next door to ‘em) productions as Collier’s or Liberty in origin. Most attempt a Strand look (characterised specifically by the bow tie, turned-down collar and physical likenesses to W. Paget and Doyle), but they always find themselves slipping into the same trappings of decking them out in the all too familiar costumes and characterisations immortalised by Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce.

Perhaps the most classic example would have to be the Mapleton Films’ adaptations of THE SIGN OF THE FOUR and THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES (staring Ian Richardson as Holmes). The casting, characterisation and design were so like those in the Rathbone/Bruce films that – were it not for the noticeable lack of monochrome – it could almost be a Rathbone/Bruce number.

In 2000, we seemed to have yet another return to the Collier’s style (as true to the whole Gillette ethos as MURDER BY DECREE was) with a Canadian television remake of THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES. In an unusual choice of casting, Holmes was portrayed by Matt Frewer who – in my opinion at least – bears a striking similarity to Steele’s familiar depiction of Holmes (pictured left). Although – in terms of being faithful to the original novel – the script deteriorated into a rushed ending, the characters were played with greater credibility than in any other HOUND movie I’ve seen before. Matt Frewer put in an excellent performance as an erratic and highly eccentric Holmes. Some might say that he over-played the part; but in comparison to other Holmes’, I believe that Frewer put in the most varied interpretation since Jeremy Brett.

And so it seems that – no matter who makes the film or T.V. series, or why, or how – if it is to be in any way a success, the producers are inevitably drawn to the conclusion that there can be little alternative outside of the visual parameters set by the immortal illustrations of Sidney Paget and Frederic Dorr Steele.

Back to the Home Page

LEGAL NOTICE

This site has been created and maintained by Lord Blackhood der Kether (BA), Lorraine Kukla & Stef Kukla. Anyone found using any of the Kukla illustrations or Blackhood texts on this web site - WITHOUT the express permission of Lord Blackhood, Ms. Kukla; or Mr Kukla - will be considered in breach of copyright and will be prosecuted accordingly.