The Sign of The Four is definitely a singular book compared to all the other Sherlock Holmes novels (It is probably Holmes’ influence that I used the word ’singular’ in that sentence). Sure, it has many features that you normally identify with a Holmes novel, but there is a very major difference in the kind of mystery it deals with. Usually, a typical Holmes novel follows the sequence: problem, deduction, solution, retrospection. Where Four breaks the tradition is that the problem we are presented with at the start of the novel is not really the whole problem, it is only one small piece of a larger whole; a tip of the iceberg, so to speak. The iceberg is revealed to us, slowly, bit by bit, as the story progresses, at the same time as it is revealed to Holmes and Watson; which is why we feel as if they don’t know anything more than we do. Which is partly true, because Watson, being the narrator, cannot possibly be ahead of the reader. Holmes, well Holmes is usually ahead of everyone around him.
The story begins when the lovely (Watson’s adjective) Miss Mary Morstan knocks on the door of the famous quarters at 221B Baker Street to consult Sherlock Holmes about the disappearance of her father ten years ago. Not only that, she is faced with a rather happy problem; someone has been sending her a huge pearl of enormous value for the last six years. As if this is not puzzling enough, she gets a letter from the pearl-sender asking her to meet him, bringing with her two friends if she is too suspicious. Holmes advises her to keep her appointment with himself and Watson accompanying her, and the story takes off.
The thread leads them to Mr Thaddeus Sholto, a nervous, bald-headed man, son of Major John Sholto, who was a close friend of Captain Arthur Morstan while they were serving the Indian Regiment of the British army. Thaddeus tells the trio about how Sholto and Morstan had come into possession of a treasure when they were in India, how they brought it back to England and how, over a fight about how the treasure should be divided, Morstan hit his head against the treasure-chest and died a freak death. He also tells them how he, along with his brother Bartholomew Sholto, figured out where the treasure was hidden. He informs Miss Morstan that it was he who had been sending the yearly pearl both as a compensation for her father’s death and also because she had as much right to the treasure as he and his brother did.
All four of them then go to Pondicherry Lodge where Bartholomew is waiting for them with the treasure. But why is the lodge bathed in darkness all over except for the housekeeper’s room? Why is Bartholomew’s door locked from inside? When they peek through the hole, they find Bartholomew sitting on his chair, relaxed, facing the door, grotesquely smiling, and stone dead. What possible weapon could have caused such a contortion of facial features and limbs? How could the murderer have reached Bartholomew’s room in the first place? Who were the murderers? What happened to the treasure? And what is the piece of paper pinned to Bartholomew’s chest, which looks like a child’s scribble? What could the words, ’The sign of the four : Jonathan Small, Mahomet Singh, Abdullah Khan, Dost Akbar’ found on the piece of paper possibly mean?
Accompany Holmes and Watson as they unravel mystery after semi-mystery in the quest to get to the bottom of the tale. Meet Toby the dog, whose help Holmes would rather have than that of the whole detective force of London; meet Atheney Jones, the blundering Scotland Yard detective assigned to solve the Sholto murder case; meet the ’Baker Street irregulars’, a bunch of street vanguards who Holmes uses in many of his cases to get vital, unofficial information; and finally, hold on to your seats as Holmes and Watson chase down their suspects in one of the fastest boat chases in the history of fictional crime.
’The Hound of the Baskervilles’ is the most popular of the Sherlock Holmes novels, though personally, Four beats it fair and square in the intricacy of its plot. While Hound was the embodiment of the obedient son in that it stuck to the ’Problem, analysis, solution, retrospection’ sequence, Four boldly treads in grey territory all over, analyzing, solving and revealing more of the problem without any structure whatsoever. So while reading Four, readers will be hard-pressed to neatly classify parts of the book into various compartments, which highly enhances the sheer quality of the reading experience.
However, for the same reason, Four does not give you the tingles down your spine which Hound manages to do so well, because with Four, the problem is solved in steps, as it is revealed, while Hound hits you right in the middle of the face with the whole solution coming to you at once. Plus, Hound had an eerie, supernatural feel to it which Four distinctly lacks.
But don’t expect to be let off the hook completely. There are a few parts in Four which will make you turn around in your chair just to make sure there is no one else in the room; that is, of course, if you are foolish enough to read it alone. Please make sure you have some kind of human presence in the room besides yourself, and no, you don’t have to thank me later. You will want to, but you don’t have to.