Based on my topic and my thesis statement which are inclined to the comparison of the setting in the two novels, they are, “ Sherlock Holmes: Two Plays” by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and “ Live and Let Die, A James Bond Adventure” by Ian Fleming, I have found and analyze some evidences that related to my topic and my thesis statement above.
In this research I would like to connect the theory of N. Scott Momadav with the comparison of these two novels. N. Scott Momadav said that the sense of place is very to most writers, and I want to prove the existence of this theory in the novel, I will start from the first novel( Sherlock Holmes novel). Sherlock Holmes is a story about detective who have a smart thinking in reaviling every case that he faced. In this story has told that the setting was hapenned in the end of nineteenth centuries, and the main character ( Sherlock Holmes ) did his case in London, the great capital was a rainy foggy city, where the police often have difficulty in catching criminals. As the theory of Momadav said before, this story consist of the prove that support Momadav’s theory, like the first scene of Sherlock Holmes novel at the first setting’s explanation, told that “ the inside of Wilson’s shop, it is a little shop, with a lot of clocks’ pictures, watches etc ”. I think that it has strong connected with Momadav’s theory, I think the writer wanted to describe clearly about the setting in order to invite the readers to feel the setting, and also the second scene, the writer told that, “ The office of Pope’s court-a room with only a table and two chairs. Duncan Ross, a men with very red hair is sitting behind the table. We can hear the noise of a lot of people out in the street ”. The writer also told the spessific setting ( at the page 6 ) when Watson ( Holmes’ Partner ) said “ it’s the morning chronicle of 27th April, 1890 ”. I think that the writer also told the historical and the geographical setting, actually, I guess that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document