Vivian Darkbloom wrote “Holmes is Where the Heart is” to examine the unusual behaviors in Sherlock and Helen. However, the fault in her arguments is the assumptions and false information that back up her assertions. Darkbloom assumes that Helen is relevant to the story. With relations involving Holmes, any relationship that is considered to be an extra motive is explicitly stated and Vivian takes advantage of the lack of information and attempts to correlate all the missing pieces of the miscellaneous characters together in disarray. The surviving step daughter is simply the catalyst that puts the story and the plot into motion. Vivian drives her case by finding flaws in the snake committing the crime such as “snakes can’t hear whistlers”, “snakes can’t climb up bell-ups” and pointing out the inconsistencies in how Julia Stoner and Dr. Grimesby died (13).…show more content… By desperately finding multiple faults in the snake, Darkbloom discredits her argument and gives the impression that she is twisting information in her favor. Lastly, Darkbloom discusses trust the reader places on the narrator such as “Helen’s word that there was a Percy Armitage” or the fact that Watson never mentions the death of the late sister to argue that certain parts of the story are misconstrued in Watson’s point of view (14). Regardless, the story is about the mysterious noises that occur at night and the story does not add any substance if Doyle devotes all his time answering the minuscule questions that completely tie the story together. Vivian’s suggestion that Sherlock and Helen are or were a married reflects her ingratitude towards the short
