In its above usage the term asexual does not refer to the biological characteristics of the detective but rather to the way he deals with other human beings. Evidence to support this proposed fourth characteristic, i.e. that a detective should behave asexually, can be found in the Poe, Wilkie Collins, and Conan Doyle detective stories. Poe's Dupin and Conan Doyle's Holmes show no interest in the opposite sex. Though some may argue that this lack of interest in the opposite sex is due to an interest in the same sex, the evidence to support this claim is less than conclusive. Rather, I simply propose that these two detectives remain sexually uninvolved in order to be able to think clearly about the cases. Wilkie Collins' Sharpin, who fails to suspect the guilty woman he has fallen for, shows what happens when a detective allows his sexuality to cloud his judgement.
At no point in the stories concerning Dupin and Holmes did I feel that they were capable of having feelings of sexual desire. If Dupin had not sought revenge and if Holmes did not use drugs and play practical jokes I wouldn't be sure if they are actually even human. These two uber-detective refuse to allow their sexuality to hinder them from solving a case. This asexual behavior, since it is so crucial to the triumph of the detectives, should be included as a necessary characteristic of detective fiction.
Admittedly, while I like that you chose to expand on Teresha’s idea about adding a Fourth Characteristic to the Ellery Queen Yardstick of detective fiction (as it created a good dialogue b/w the two blogs), I’m a bit confused as to why you chose to piggyback your idea with so relatively brief a discussion. (Furthermore, if you agree w/ Teresha, are you not then adding a fifth dimension?) Your inclusion of Poe, Collins, and Conan Doyle as your supporting evidence was a good move. But I was puzzled as to why you didn’t provide actual textual evidence to concretize such evidence, particularly when you are disputing the homosexual readings that “some may argue” for Poe’s and Conan Doyle’s detectives. Collins’ fool detective, Mr. Sharpin, is indeed a good counter example, but you needed explicit evidence (rather than the vague gesture you currently provide). Your closing statement again hinted at a very suggestive idea—viz. the detective in the Victorian detective genre seems somehow super-human at the same time that he is all-too-human. But this was again just a gesture. Be sure that you give yourself the requisite space and time to expand your ideas into the fullness of their suggestiveness.
ReplyDelete