A Study in Scarlet, III: Morality & Revenge

   A Study in Scarlet was the original Sherlock Holmes story, written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in England in 1887. The story is divided into two parts. Part One ends with the case solved and the murderer caught in London; Part Two begins with a flashback, taking the audience four decades into the past in Utah. By the end of the book, it becomes clear that this flashback is the murderer’s explanation for his crimes. Jefferson Hope, the murderer, forces the audience to sympathize with his desire for revenge, raising an important question about the difference between revenge and justice. Although Hope believes he is punishing people who deserve it, his actions are driven by a personal desire for retribution rather than by justice itself. His story becomes especially interesting when compared with other characters who pursue revenge for very different reasons and with very different results.

     Jefferson Hope's story provides a useful starting point because his desire for revenge comes from a genuine wrong. Drebber and Stangerson were responsible for destroying the future Hope wanted with Lucy Ferrier, and their actions eventually contributed to her death. Hope spends years pursuing the men responsible because he believes they deserve to be punished. He eventually makes himself “judge, jury, and executioner,” deciding that he has the right to determine their punishment himself. This is where his revenge separates itself from justice. The original wrong has already happened, and Hope is acting afterward to make the people responsible suffer. His anger is understandable because Drebber and Stangerson caused terrible harm, but his goal remains personal retribution. Once he has avenged Lucy and John Ferrier, he has nothing left to live for.

     Maleficent demonstrates an even more destructive form of revenge because her aim becomes focused on causing suffering rather than restoring what was taken from her. Like Hope, Maleficent is genuinely wronged. Stefan betrays her and takes away something deeply important to her, giving her a reason to be angry. However, instead of seeking to restore what she lost, she curses Aurora in order to make Stefan suffer. Aurora is not responsible for what Stefan did, but Maleficent initially treats her as a way to hurt him. Her revenge therefore creates a new victim who had nothing to do with the original wrongdoing. Her aim has become separated from the thing that was actually taken from her. Even though her anger began with a legitimate grievance, she allows her desire for Stefan to suffer to become more important than what is actually right. Her story shows how revenge can become more destructive when the revenger stops thinking about what should be restored and focuses only on making the person who caused the pain suffer.

     Captain Hook demonstrates another destructive form of revenge because he becomes so focused on his hatred that he cannot see beyond it. Hook's desire to defeat Peter Pan is connected to his own past, but his obsession with revenge becomes tied to his desire for control and tyranny. Peter Pan represents youth, possibility, and potential, while Hook is determined to destroy him. Instead of allowing his aim to change as his circumstances change, Hook remains focused on defeating the person he hates. McDermott similarly describes Hook as obsessing over his desire for revenge and becoming consumed by his fixation on Peter (McDermott). His revenge becomes almost completely focused on the past, while Peter represents a future that Hook cannot control. This makes Hook's revenge especially destructive because he is willing to destroy potential in order to satisfy his desire for power. Unlike someone who recognizes that revenge has consumed too much of his life and chooses to move beyond it, Hook never reaches that point. He does not recognize the error in his aim, and his refusal to change ultimately prevents him from having a better future.

     Inigo Montoya provides the closest comparison to Jefferson Hope because both men dedicate their lives to avenging someone they love. Inigo spends years searching for the man who killed his father, just as Hope spends years searching for the men responsible for the destruction of Lucy's life. Both men eventually accomplish the revenge they have spent so long pursuing. However, their stories become very different after that point. Hope reaches the end of his life with revenge still as his final purpose. Once he has punished Drebber and Stangerson, he has nothing left to pursue and is content to die. Inigo, however, does not allow revenge to remain the purpose of his entire life. After he kills Count Rugen, he can begin reaching toward other things instead of remaining focused on the person he hated. He has friends, love, and a future waiting for him. His revenge does not become justice simply because he succeeds, but his story demonstrates that a person can finish pursuing revenge without making revenge the purpose of the rest of his life. Inigo's ability to move toward something greater after his revenge gives him a future that Hope never allows himself to have.

     The stories of Jefferson Hope, Maleficent, Captain Hook, and Inigo Montoya show that revenge and justice can begin with the same observation: someone has been wronged. What separates them is the aim of the person responding to that wrong. Maleficent allows her desire to hurt Stefan to create another innocent victim, while Hook becomes so consumed by revenge that he refuses to see anything beyond his hatred. Hope has a more understandable grievance, but he still makes revenge the final purpose of his life. Inigo comes closest to escaping this pattern because, after fulfilling his revenge, he reaches toward a future that is greater than the person he hated. Even the most understandable revenge is still not justice simply because it produces a satisfying ending. Justice requires an aim beyond personal retribution, but the stories also show that a person's aims can change. A person who remains trapped in revenge can destroy his own future, while a person who learns to pursue something greater can create a new one. The difference between a life consumed by revenge and a life beyond it is not whether the wrong ever happened, but whether the person allows a better aim to change what happens next.

Works Cited

McDermott, Shawna. “Hook (1991).” Humanities Institute, Humanities Institute, n.d.