Impact: A Study in Scarlet

The Doctor Who Wrote Detective Stories

Arthur Conan Doyle was twenty-seven years old and running a struggling medical practice in Southsea when he wrote A Study in Scarlet. The practice was slow enough that he had long hours to fill, and he had already published a handful of forgettable short stories in minor magazines. He was not yet a literary figure. He was a doctor waiting for patients.

His model for Holmes was real: Dr. Joseph Bell, a surgeon at the University of Edinburgh under whom Doyle had studied. Bell was famous among his students for his uncanny ability to deduce facts about patients — occupation, habits, history — from a single glance at their hands or posture. Doyle had watched him do it in person and never forgot it. When he sat down to create a detective, he gave Holmes Bell's method and turned it into a philosophy: observation over assumption, evidence over instinct, reason as a form of almost aesthetic pleasure.

Doyle would later grow weary of his creation to the point of killing him off at Reichenbach Falls in 1893 — only to be forced by public outcry to resurrect him a decade later. But in 1886, Holmes was simply a fresh idea in a young doctor's notebook, a character built to do something new: show his work.

A Spectacular Near-Miss

The publishing history of A Study in Scarlet is a useful reminder that literary gatekeepers are not infallible. Ward, Lock & Co. accepted the manuscript after six rejections, but their enthusiasm was limited. They offered Doyle twenty-five pounds outright and asked him to wait a year before publication so they could include it in their Christmas annual. Doyle, who needed money, accepted. He would later call it one of the worst deals he ever made.

The novel attracted almost no critical attention when it appeared. It was not reviewed widely, not discussed in literary circles, not celebrated as the beginning of anything. The character of Sherlock Holmes might have simply evaporated had it not been for an American editor named Joseph Marshall Stoddart, who met Doyle in 1889 and commissioned a second Holmes story — The Sign of the Four — almost on the spot. The short stories that followed in The Strand Magazine beginning in 1891 are what made Holmes a household name. But all of it traces back to the cramped lodgings at 221B Baker Street, first described in this overlooked Christmas filler.

How to Meet a Legend

One of the things A Study in Scarlet does that still rewards attention is the care with which it stages the first encounter between Holmes and Watson. Watson arrives in London broken — wounded at Maiwand, felled by enteric fever, discharged, penniless, friendless. The opening pages are quietly devastating: a man who served his country and came back with shattered health and eleven shillings and sixpence a day, drifting through a city that does not know or care he exists.

Then a chance meeting at the Criterion Bar with a former acquaintance, a mutual friend who happens to know a peculiar man looking for a flatmate, a cab ride to a chemical laboratory — and there, crouching over a workbench, is Holmes. 'I've found it! I've found it,' he shouts, waving a test tube. 'I have found a re-agent which is precipitated by haemoglobin, and by nothing else.' His first words in all of fiction are about blood. Appropriately enough.

What Doyle understood, perhaps instinctively, was that Holmes needed Watson not just as a narrator but as a foil — someone whose ordinariness could measure Holmes's strangeness. Watson is not stupid. He is experienced, observant, courageous. He simply cannot do what Holmes does. That gap between them is where every Holmes story lives.

What the Book Is Really About

A Study in Scarlet is technically two books stitched together, and not entirely successfully. The first half is a detective story set in London; the second half abruptly becomes a flashback western set in the Utah desert among early Mormon settlers. Contemporary readers sometimes find the lurch disorienting. Doyle himself acknowledged the structure was clumsy. But the two halves share a common argument: that the past is never finished with you.

The murders Holmes investigates are not random acts of violence. They are the consequence of events that happened years earlier, thousands of miles away, to people who thought they had left their history behind. The killer is not a monster. He is a man executing a plan he has been carrying out for decades, across continents, because of a wrong done to someone he loved. Doyle gives him his own chapters, his own voice, his own grief. It is a surprisingly moral construction for what might have been a simple puzzle story.

Holmes himself barely registers these depths. He is interested in the mechanism of the crime, not its emotional architecture. That contrast — between the detective's cool detachment and the raw human suffering underneath every case — is the engine that would power sixty stories.

The Method That Changed Everything

Before Holmes, the dominant model for fictional detectives was the intuitive genius: Poe's Dupin solves crimes by a kind of inspired reasoning that the reader can admire but not quite follow. Holmes does something different. He shows his work. 'You have been in Afghanistan, I perceive,' he says to Watson at their first meeting — and then, pages later, he explains exactly how he knew: the tan, the bearing, the injured arm, the military posture. The deduction is reproducible. You could, in theory, do it yourself.

This was genuinely new. It made the reader a participant rather than a spectator, invited them to compete with the detective, to spot what Holmes spotted before he announced it. Every locked-room mystery, every detective who explains the solution at the end, every puzzle narrative that rewards re-reading owes something to this structural innovation. Agatha Christie, Raymond Chandler, P.D. James — the whole tradition runs through Baker Street.

Conan Doyle also established conventions so thoroughly that they now feel like natural laws: the eccentric detective and the sensible companion, the Scotland Yard inspector who needs help but resents admitting it, the client who arrives with an apparently inexplicable problem, the final revelation that makes every earlier detail click into place. He built the template that a century of imitators have been filling in ever since.

A Cultural Footprint Without Parallel

The Holmes industry is, at this point, almost impossible to quantify. There have been over seventy actors playing Holmes on screen. Basil Rathbone defined him for one generation; Jeremy Brett for another; Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller revived him simultaneously for a third. There are Holmes pastiches, Holmes prequels, Holmes retellings set in feudal Japan, Victorian San Francisco, and twenty-second-century space stations. The Baker Street Irregulars, a society of Holmes enthusiasts founded in 1934, still meets annually in New York and treats the original stories as a kind of sacred text requiring scholarly interpretation.

221B Baker Street is now a museum. The address did not actually exist when Doyle wrote it — the real Baker Street did not extend that far — but the building that was retroactively assigned the number receives hundreds of thousands of visitors a year. There is a statue of Holmes outside Baker Street Tube station. The word 'deerstalker,' which Doyle never actually used in the stories, is now inseparable from the character in the public imagination. Holmes has escaped his own creator so completely that most people who know his name have never read a word of the original text.

That text begins here — with a broke ex-army doctor at a bar, looking for somewhere cheap to live.

Why It Still Reads

There is a pleasure in reading A Study in Scarlet that has nothing to do with nostalgia or cultural obligation. It moves fast. Doyle had no interest in Victorian literary ornamentation; his prose is clean and quick, built for a reader who wants to know what happens next. Watson's voice, established in those opening pages of injury and displacement, is warm and self-deprecating in a way that wears well. You trust him immediately.

The Holmes who appears in this first novel is also, in some ways, stranger and more interesting than the polished icon he later became. He is described as ignorant of basic facts — Watson compiles a list of his limitations early on, which includes no knowledge of literature, philosophy, or astronomy — but capable of identifying 140 different varieties of tobacco ash. He is odd in ways that feel less like affectation and more like genuine cognitive difference. He has not yet been smoothed into legend.

Reading A Study in Scarlet now, you get to experience something rare: the moment before a myth solidifies. Holmes is still becoming himself. Watson has just met him. The game, as someone would later say, is afoot — but it is only just beginning.

Further Reading & Resources

Related Works in Our Library