why did doyle chose Watson to narrate the story instead of having Holmes himself ? what are the benefits and drawbacks of doing in this way?
Dr Watson as a narrator lends immediacy as well as perspective to the narrative. Not making Sherlock Holmes the narrator seems to be a deliberate and successful narrative strategy on the part of Conan Doyle. This is because it would have led to an evaporation of most of the mystery had the detective told us first hand how he arrives at the solution of the cases and what leads him to it.
Dr Watson is as befuddled as the reader as to Holmes' method and with him, we also join in a game of detection. Our game being detecting how the detective arrives at the solutions and his analytical methods. Dr Watson as the narrator is not just narrating the incidents but also participating in the narrative. If Sherlock Holmes studies the case, Dr Watson studies Sherlock Holmes and his character flaws, idiosyncrasies and eccentricities. He illustrates how the detective is different from any ordinary man but the difference being his fastidious adherence to a code of rationality and logic in solving the cases presented to him. This gives a complete picture of the detective and adds to our perception of the character. It is a human portrayal of a seemingly ingenious and gifted character. This can also be seen as a drawback because only a certain amount of perspective allowed to Dr Watson,he is not omniscient nor unbiased in his narrative. There is only one side of the narrative he can see which can be limiting in terms of giving us a larger picture of the case had the author himself narrated. We also do not get an insight into the doctor's character because he concentrates more on the detective and the case rather than recording his own views.
Dr Watson is as befuddled as the reader as to Holmes' method and with him, we also join in a game of detection. Our game being detecting how the detective arrives at the solutions and his analytical methods. Dr Watson as the narrator is not just narrating the incidents but also participating in the narrative. If Sherlock Holmes studies the case, Dr Watson studies Sherlock Holmes and his character flaws, idiosyncrasies and eccentricities. He illustrates how the detective is different from any ordinary man but the difference being his fastidious adherence to a code of rationality and logic in solving the cases presented to him. This gives a complete picture of the detective and adds to our perception of the character. It is a human portrayal of a seemingly ingenious and gifted character. This can also be seen as a drawback because only a certain amount of perspective allowed to Dr Watson,he is not omniscient nor unbiased in his narrative. There is only one side of the narrative he can see which can be limiting in terms of giving us a larger picture of the case had the author himself narrated. We also do not get an insight into the doctor's character because he concentrates more on the detective and the case rather than recording his own views.