Q

Sherlock Holmes and dogs in Canon

Well, apparently statistics are going to be a recurring obsession, to me, and I don’t even try any more to fight this compulsion… And as recently my thoughts have been driven (also) to the relationship between canonical Sherlock Holmes and dogs, here I am, with a little statistical analysis of this issue (that is, with a little crazy divertissement…).

Any holmesian dog lover will be happy to know that dogs not only play a relevant role in the 17% of canonical stories, but they also generally play a POSITIVE role, as they directly or indirectly help Holmes and Watson in solving the case at hand in the 80% of the stories in which they appear. Amongst these stories, 30% see the dog as directly ‘assisting’ Holmes (twice as hunting dogs which help the investigation through their nose - in SIGN and MISS - and once as, alas!, guinea pig - in STUD), while in the 50% of these cases the dog someway provides a vital clue to the solution of the mystery.

Only in two stories (20% of these cases) - HOUN and COPP - the dog appears in a ‘villain’ role (better, as helper of the villain in charge), but in one of these two cases - COPP - the same dog eventually turns against his own evil master.

And Sherlock Holmes appears a fan of dogs, if we consider what he says about “the beautiful, faithful nature of dogs” in LION.

Not to mention, of course, the many possible uses he takes into account for dogs in criminal detection: not just as sleuth-hounds, but according to his idea that “a dog reflects the family life. Whoever saw a frisky dog in a gloomy family, or a sad dog in a happy one? Snarling people have snarling dogs, dangerous people have dangerous ones. And their passing moods may reflect the passing moods of others” - a topic about which Holmes even considered writing a small monograph (CREE)!