Compare and contrast the Characters of Professor Moriaty Essay

This essay is to show the contrast between two of the villains out of the Sherlock Holmes short stories, Professor Moriarty and Dr Roylott. I will talk about the differences and the similarities between the two villains and how the behave toward Holmes. Dr Roylott is a character from â€Å"The Speckled Band† where he killed his daughter by use of a poisonous snake. Professor Moriarty is a character from â€Å"The Final Problem†. By using the text of these books I am also able to identify and show Conan Doyle’s methods of characterisation. The appearance is one of the primary aspects of a character because without imagery you cannot print a picture of the character in your head of what the character would look like. The appearances of the two villains are very different in build and facial and body features. Dr Roylott is a very large person, as it states in The speckled band, where Roylott meets Sherlock at Baker Street. â€Å"So tall was he that his hat actually brushed the cross-bar.† This shows that Dr Roylott was a man of great height. It also states after that quote â€Å"and his breadth seamed to span across it† This other quote about his build explains that not only was he tall but had a very large chest, and was very bold in his stature. This advantage of size was used to intimidate Sherlock by confronting him. The sheer size difference was used to Roylotts full advantage. Roylotts face is described as being wrinkled and weathered, â€Å"A large face, seared with a thousand wrinkles.† This describes Roylott being quite old or as a man who has been quick to temper and he suffers with a vast amount of stress. It also shows that Dr Roylott is a man who doesn’t act like most people in his class status and is slightly adventurous and hard working. Conan Doyle use of â€Å"a thousand wrinkled† in an exaggerated from and gives more meaning to in that he seamed to have that numerous wrinkles which is able to paint a more accurate image of Roylott in the audiences head. Roylott is also described as a man of agriculture even though he is a man of anger and impulsive rage. â€Å"a peculiar mixture of the professional and of the agricultural.† This explains his professional abilities have bought him wealth and agriculture because of his intelligence. Being wealthy he dresses like a man of his status, in stereotypical dress-code and is s aid as wearing â€Å"a black top-hat, a long frockcoat, and a pair of high gaiters.† Professor Moriarty is quite the contrary where he is nowhere near as large or bold as Dr Roylott. Moriarty is said to be more of a lean build â€Å"He is extremely tall and thin.† Moriarty is quite a tedious man in comparison of the body structure of the two villains but it doesn’t make any difference in Professor Moriarty’s intellectual abilities, and Moriarty does not need a physical advantage. Moriarty is also described as having a large forehead that curves out. This is in relation to his vast superior intelligence to most people, and Doyle used that imagery to try and make the audience see Moriarty as having a large brain that his head has to curve to allow space for it. Moriarty is also described in The final problem as â€Å"He is clean-shaven, pale, and ascetic looking.† For Conan Doyle to say that Moriarty is â€Å"ascetic† he is able to instantly make the audience think that he is a cruel man, but not adventurous. With Moriarty’s intellectual capabilities Doyle is able to make the audience think that he is not committing crimes, but organising them. It also says that Moriarty has a lot of self-discipline for himself. The manner of the two characters is very different. Dr Roylott is a more aggressive man, whereas Professor Moriarty is a more rational man, and talks about something rather that acts like a violent boisterous person. Dr Roylott shows his extreme impatience and violent tendencies when he met Sherlock and Dr Watson, in Sherlock’s home. Roylott storms into where Sherlock is and began to shout at Sherlock about his daughter had been there earlier. Instead of sitting down like Moriarty he confronts Holmes in an aggressive manner and uses intimidation to try and get Holmes to tell him what he wants. Sherlock is not threatened by the show of anger and retains his rationality. In this Roylott realises that he is not going to intimidate Holmes and demonstrates his strength by bending a fire poker to show his power, and leaves with a threat, still trying to intimidate Holmes but also proving a point, he means business. Unaffected by this Holmes carries on with the investigation. Moriarty is the complete opposite in physical aggression, for he isn’t as bulky as Roylott, but in the same way Moriarty attempts to intimidate Holmes, not by a physical show of strength but by a complex and articulate array of words. When Moriarty visits Holmes he insults Sherlock not long after he arrives, â€Å"you have less frontal development than I expected.† This is an insult where Moriarty is trying to say that Holmes is not intelligent enough to out perform Moriarty, in the sense that he will not be able to accuse him without evidence that Holmes will not acquire. This is an entirely alternate method in contrast to Roylott. Moriarty is calm, collective and does not proceed to violence and speaks in a relaxed manor that everything is satisfactory. Moriarty does not need to try and intimidate Sherlock because everything he says carries a lot of weight and he knows that Holmes has met an equally matched adversary, himself.