The Sign of Four and Murder on the Orient Express: Comparing and Contrasting Plot Structures and Heroes

Detective fiction slowly emerged during the nineteenth century, experiencing very little success at the outset. “The Murders in the Rue Morgue,” a short story written by renowned poet Edgar Allen Poe, truly brought detective fiction onto the literary scene in 1841 by proving that this genre could generate sequels (Sundstrom 1). The clever, perceptive, and detail-oriented British detective Sherlock Holmes, a nineteenth-century literary icon, remains one of the most famous detectives in literary history. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle illustriously created Sherlock Holmes, who became the central figure in many of Doyle’s novels. Doyle modeled the detective’s character after one of his favorite professors, Dr. Joseph Bell, a surgeon known for his powers of close observation (Konnikova 12). In 1890, Doyle published The Sign of the Four and further developed Holmes’ character (“Sherlock Holmes”). The Sherlock Holmes series ultimately ensconced the demand for detective fiction and enabled the burgeoning genre to thrive, ushering in its Golden Era. Agatha Christie emerged as the “Queen of Mystery” at the apex of detective literature during the early twentieth century. She conceived of another famous detective named Hercule Poirot, a retired detective from Belgium modeled after Sherlock Holmes in her 1934 story Murder on the Orient Express. She based this story on the abduction and murder of Charles Lindbergh’s child in 1932, and it remains one of Agatha Christie’s most famous stories (“Christie”). The Sign of Four and Murder on the Orient Express both have detective heroes with extraordinary crime solving abilities, although their tactics in solving crime diverge as a result of the locale of the crime. What sets these two novels apart is how the different settings mirror each detective’s unique modes of crime solving, the nature of the murder, the way clues are left behind for each detective to interpret, and the final revelations of how each respective hero solves mysterious and difficult crimes.

Sherlock Holmes became a paragon for heroic detectives in this burgeoning genre that other heroes such as Poirot later emulated. Using logic and intuition, detectives like Holmes and Poirot would heroically solve crimes. The intellectual struggle to analyze how clues fit together in the search for the truth about a crime remained central to the genre during its infancy, and Christie modeled her protagonist after the heroic qualities exuded by the infamous Sherlock Holmes (Sunderstrom). Holmes is perceptive, extraordinarily logical and possesses great observation and deductive reasoning skills; no other fictional character is more famous for his intellectual fortitude and empiricism. Holmes learns to filter his brain’s instincts regarding which faculties should or should not play into his assessment of an unknown individual (Konnikova 39). He uses very business-like language when he demonstrates his observation skills: “[a] Client is to me a mere unit, a factor in a problem” (40). Such language suggests that Holmes enumerates the possibilities of what happened and analyzes them like they are pieces of a puzzle (177). Holmes goal is to obtain all possible pieces of information that will lead him to arrest his suspect and serve justice (Konnikova 242). To stimulate his brain, he uses cocaine so that his mind rebels at stagnation and cultivates his rational faculties: “I crave for mental exaltation. That is why I have chosen my own particular profession, or rather created it, for I am the only one in the world" (Doyle 6). Holmes further justifies why he uses cocaine: “Give me problems, give me work, give me the most abstruse cryptogram or the most intricate analysis, and I am in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence” (Konnikova 35). Although his mental faculties and superior logic limn him as an heroic detective, Holmes’ addiction to cocaine in order to deftly perform his work humanizes his lofty character.

Christie’s hero Hercule Poirot possesses similar qualities to Doyle’s Holmes, but often he does not follow the law and lets murderers get away with their crime. A retired detective from Belgian, Poirot possesses wealth of knowledge about crime-solving because of his long tenure in the police force (“Christie”). Christie modeled Poirot after Holmes, as Poirot possesses brilliant logic, eccentricity, but also vanity (McArdle 2). Christie shows his superior intellect when she compares the thoughts of Poirot, Dr. Constantine, and M. Bouc regarding the case in part III. While Poirot sits quietly and mulls over the facts of the case, M. Bouc becomes distracted and thinks about the repairs the train needs. In the meantime, Dr. Constantine thinks about pornography (Christie 192). As a detective, Poirot must show his intellectual superiority, which is evident when he sits down and brainstorms with Poirot and Dr. Constantine. He already knows the details of the crime but wants to have his suspicions confirmed by his cohorts. Poirot not only possesses great intellect in comparison to other characters such as M. Bouc, he also cares deeply about other people, which shows he has a strong moral compass. As a result, he sometimes arbitrates moral laws and renders them superior to man-written ones (McArdle 2). Poirot seeks to understand the circumstances and psychology of both the victim and the murderer (“Christie”). Much pleasure of Poirot can be found in the denouement. He gathers the involved parties and presents his findings (McArdle 3). While his superior mental faculties glorify his character, his emphasis on morality over arbitrary law as well as his vanity humanizes him. Sidetracked by his moustache, Poirot cares too much about his physical appearance and often gets distracted by British women on the train such as Miss Debenhem. Observing her countenance and comportment with other women, Poirot thinks, “Perhaps [she ] had demurred, Appearances are important” (Christie 30). Such vanity and preoccupation with appearances, just like Holmes’ drug use, reveal flaws in both of these heroic detectives and function as a way to humanize these gifted individuals.

While Holmes and Poirot exude similar qualities as detective heroes, the settings in each novel differ, which makes each detective’s powers uniquely fitting to the problem he is attempting to solve. The setting in Murder on the Orient Express solely takes place in the confined space of a train, which highlights Poirot’s keen observational techniques and abilities as a crime solver. The confined space renders it impossible for the characters to put distance between each other. They are constantly under surveillance (Christie 24) Before the murder takes place, Poirot begins to observe and study each of the people in the dining car, noting the curious impression of a man that passed by him (17). A man by the name of Mr. Ratchett sits unexpectedly in a chair across from Poirot and introduces himself. A wealthy man, Ratchett knows Poirot’s name and wants to hire him for twenty-thousand dollars to find out who has threatened his life. Further demonstrating his vanity, Poirot refuses the generous Ratchett’s case not only because the case does not “interest” him but also because he does not like Ratchett’s face (34). After the murder of Ratchett takes place, the confining setting enables Poirot to use an interview style for investigation and question each passenger in the Calais Coach (McArdle 3). Poirot takes a psychological approach to solving crime (65). He focuses more on understanding the circumstances of the murder for both the victim and the murderer and wants to comprehend the psychological dispositions of each party (“Christie”). The inability for possible suspects to leave the train allows Poirot to fully investigate the crime in the manner he is accustomed to.

While the setting in Christie’s story is limited to a moving train, The Sign of Four takes place in a variety of settings that span temporal and geographical contexts. As a result, solving the crime at hand was much more difficult for Holmes. The story begins at 221 Baker Street where Holmes ingests cocaine, an activity he regularly engaged in to lessen the boredom of an idle mind and to stimulate his superior mental faculties ( Doyle 5-6). He states “I crave for mental exaltation. That is why I have chosen my own particular profession, or rather created it, for I am the only one in the world" (Doyle 6). Holmes’ personal space empowers him and fosters an environment in which he conveys his own vanity regarding his superior intellect (Konnikova 35). Holmes takes the puzzling case of the disappearance of Mary Morstan’s dad. He mostly relies on a trail of clues in solving crimes. Holmes pursues the case in various settings and contexts as a result of a sequence of problems and obstacles. He examines the way Mary Morstan’s letters to her father are written in order to extrapolate possible clues to his whereabouts. Holmes tells her to hold onto it (20). In Pondicherry Lodge, Holmes finds traces of treasure seekers (37). These various settings reveal the complexity of the crime and highlight Holmes’ extraordinary abilities as a crime detective. Furthermore, they reveal that Holmes will go to great lengths to ensure that the law is upheld and justice is served.

In both novels, the crime of murder constitutes the central plotline, and both crimes leave behind a trail of different clues for each detective to interpret and solve; however only one of the crimes shows meticulous planning. In Murder on the Orient Express, the plot structure revolves around the murder of a man named, Mr. Ratchett. M. Bouc asks Poirot to oversee the investigation, and Poirot agrees to take on the case because it intrigues him (46). Poirot inspects the body but does not find a murder weapon (57-62). He thinks the best clue is a piece of burned paper in an ashtray that contains two different matches in it. Using a wire mesh from a woman’s hatbox, Poirot is able to reveal the words that were once on the paper. “- member little Daisy Armstrong” (66). These words form the best clue and ultimately help lead Poirot to the dead man’s true identity. Ratchett is, in reality, Cassetti, the man who kidnapped and murdered a child named Daisy Armstrong (67-68). Poirot logically reasons that whoever killed Ratchett tried to burn the piece of paper so that Armstrong’s name would not be associated with his murder (71). After examining everyone’s luggage, Poirot discovers several facts that seem unimportant and unrelated. Many false clues such as the spot of grease on passport, a missing button of conductor’s uniform found in luggage, and scarlet kimono found in Poirot’s luggage make it clear that the murderer carefully orchestrated this crime (75-192). The setting of the crime enables a group of people to take the law into their own hands to rectify a past injustice. Despite a confined crime scene, the trail of clues Poirot discovers reveal the complexity of the crime.

In The Sign of Four, Holmes also encounters a large trail of clues that reveal the complexity of the crime. Thaddeus Sholto learns that his brother Bartholomew found the treasure chest in a sealed-off portion of the attic in their father’s house (Doyle 32). Holmes arrives at the brother’s house and discovers Bartholomew's murdered body with a long dark thorn stuck in the skin just above the ear. He could not find the sought after treasure. A torn piece of paper with the words “The sign of the four” was placed beside his lifeless body (39). Holmes needs to obtain information that will lead him to his suspect thus drives the plot of the story (Konnikova 242). He finds certain clues that lead him to believe there were two accomplices, one of whom pulled the other up through a trapdoor in the roof. He also deduces that one of the men named Jonathan Small had a wooden leg, while the other one was his dwarf companion (Doyle 41-47). Holmes enumerates the possibilities (Konnikova 177). He deduces that Small’s associate is responsible for the murder rather than Small himself. The murder of Bartholomew Sholto was unplanned. Nonetheless, Holmes pursues Small with the assistance of Toby, a mongrel who possessed the amazing power of scent (55), the Baker Street Irregulars (67), and the clues and the evidence found in the murder room. He believes Small is the key to the mystery (Doyle 57-78). Holmes tracks Small to a boat and engages in a man-hunt down the Thames River. He catches up with Small, but before Holmes can overtake him he has to kill Small's dwarf companion (86-87). Although he faced a plethora of obstacles, his keen intellect eventually leads Holmes to bring justice for the murder.

In the final revelation of both novels, Holmes and Poirot, solve their cases, but what sets them apart is that the protagonists define justice differently. Poirot finds much pleasure in the denouement. He gathers the involved parties and presents his findings (McArdle 3). Poirot presents two solutions to all passengers. His original theory is very simple: someone on the train committed the murder and escaped through Mrs. Hubbard’s compartment (248- 265). His second theory, however, is much more complex because he realizes that all of the passengers participated in the carefully and cleverly planned Ratchett murder. Ultimately, the murderers are not brought to justice (253-263). A group of twelve passengers, the same number of members in a jury, took “justice” into their own hands when they murdered Ratchett. This notion of justice thus permeates the story. Poirot lets the murderers get away because he believes that Ratchett, the murderer of Armstrong’s child, deserved his fate (128). In response to Poirot’s belief that justice was served through Ratchett’s murder, Colonel Arbuthnot says, “say what you like, trial by jury is a sound system” (129). It is thus clear that Poirot defines justice through a moral lens rather than what the legal system defines it as. He asks M. Bouc what theory he would like to offer the Yugoslavian police, and tells him to proffer Poirot’s first theory (264). Having solved the mystery and achieving justice without a real jury and trial, the detective hero happily retires from the case (265). In Sign of Four, Holmes filters his brain’s instincts into those that should and those that should not play into his assessment of an unknown individual (Konnikova 39). Holmes thus brings the suspect, Jonathan Small, to justice by lawfully pursuing him to make him pay for his crime, which born out of personal vengeance. Holmes reveals that Small sought revenge for a past betrayal, which propelled him to commit this heinous crime (89). Unlike Poirot, Holmes believes that “private vengeance” would not bring justice for an afflicted person (Christie 129). This notion of justice permeates both novels, although the definition embraced by each hero differs.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle solidified the popularity of detective literature through the creation of Sherlock Holmes, and Agatha Christie later ascended as the leader of the Golden Age of detective literature. The character of Holmes became the model literary detective hero in the burgeoning stages of the genre’s development. Many literary detectives including Poirot became modeled after Holmes, demonstrating similar qualities to him. Like Holmes, heroic detectives such as Poirot invoked logic and intuition in order to solve the crimes at hand. Although Doyle and Christie present characters that possess superior intellect, both authors humanize them in different ways to make them likable characters. While Holmes and Poirot have similar characteristics, the settings of each respective story differs and function as a tool to illuminate different meanings of justice. Isolated from the outside world on a train, the Poirot and the passengers on the train defy the written law and take justice into their hands. Holmes, on the other hand, becomes involved in a crime where law and order must be maintained. Although the nature of the crimes differ in each novel, both of them reflect different ideas about justice, a central concept in detective literature.

Works Cited

Christie, Agatha. Murder on the Orient Express. Harper. 2011. "Christies Life." Agatha Christie. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2014.

Doyle, Arthur Conan. The Sign of Four. London: Penguin, 2001. Print.

Konnikova, Maria. Mastermind: How to Think like Sherlock Holmes. New York: Viking, 2013. Print.

McArdle, Molly. “A Time Lapse Detective: 25 Years of Agatha Christie’s Poirot.” Lareviewofbooks.org. 25 November 2013. Web.

"Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Home Page." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Home Page. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Mar. 2014.

Sundstrom, Alison. "From Sherlock to SVU: The History of Detective Fiction." Breaking-character.com. N.p., 19 Nov. 2012. Web.