I'll admit up front I like these two detectives pretty much equally, so comparing them is a new thought for me. I had to research quite a bit on both of these detectives because I'm not an expert on either in any way. Let's see how it shapes up.
Sherlock Holmes
Overview: Sherlock Holmes is known for his deductive reasoning, focus on forensics, some action with disguises and even fighting, lacks much personal emotion, and is a cocaine user/addict. He often referred to his brain as his “mind palace.” According to the Guiness Book of World Records, he is the most popular fictional character to be portrayed in film and television.
Sherlock was created by author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in 1887. His first outing was in Conan Doyle’s short story, “A Study in Scarlet” and he went on write four novels and 56 other short stories in total with Sherlock.
Focus: The extent to how much modern criminalogy was influenced by a fictional character is up for debate. But, keep in mind that Jack the Ripper was active July-Nov 1888 and the police came under heavy criticism for being clueless while this fictional character that appeared on the scene the year prior showed where the police didn't pay attention to the details and crucial evidence in general.
General Sleuthing Style: Sherlock is known primarily for deductive reasoning and science to solve cases. Since he would occasionally go out on the streets and even go about in disguise, he learned "Baritsu," or correctly known as Bartitsu, a scientific mixed martial art developed in England in 1898–1902 by Edward William Barton-Wright.
Sherlock was observant and astute even when regarding both his clients and his suspects—noting not only their physical appearances but also tattoos, cuts, marks on the skin, clothing type and style, dirt on boots, and minutia of all sorts.
Continuing in his observance of the fine details, forensically, Holmes scrutinized fine details that weren't commonly considered in that time—like studying specific tire tracks, hoof prints, and shoe prints, and yes—even using a microscope to observe blood samples for evidence such as poisons.
Relationships: Sherlock was devoid of continuing relationships, except his sidekick, flatmate, and investigative partner, Dr. John Watson.
His interactions with women and potential emotional or even physical attachment is challenging. He relies on his brain and gut instinct rather than his feelings. He views emotions as a barrier to accurate and clear reasoning. "But love is an emotional thing, and whatever is emotional is opposed to the true cold reason which I place above all things." Sign of Four. He doesn't particularly trust women either.
He greatly admired Irene Adler... for her intelligence, so he viewed her as an equal to him but never seemed to want anything further. I'm not suggesting he was gay, but that relationships and everything that entails were a sacrifice on his time and attention he wasn't willing to give. Of course, there is his landlady Mrs. Hudson whom he treats well and Dr. Watson's wife later on, Mary Morstan, who Holmes seems to resent for distracting Watson. Remember the time frame of when the books were written and how women were viewed. It isn't surprising to find Holmes isolating himself from the emotional and problematic female portrayed at the time.
Hercule Poirot
Overview:
Poirot is a Belgian-born character of prolific author Agatha Christie. He appears in 33 novels and 50 short stories which is more than Holmes' body of work. His first appearance was in The Mysterious Affair at Styles” written in 1920, 33 years after Sherlock's debut. He often refers to his detective’s mind as his “little grey cells.” Note: Poirot was the only fictional character to receive an obituary on the front page of The New York Times.
Belgium is also incredibly proud of their "native-son" and treat the fictional character as if he were real with statues and honors.
Christie stated in her autobiography that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes character definitely influenced her portrayal of Hercule Poirot. Which I interpret that to be "Sherlock based, but potentially improved upon."
Poirot is described as being short and rather obsessive about his appearance—notably concerning his signature patent leather shoes (which are apparently uncomfortable—ladies, we know that sacrifice for fashion) and his perfectly-groomed mustache.
Also mentioned in Three Act Tragedy that he comes from a large family with little wealth, and has at least one younger sister. In addition to French and English, Poirot is also fluent in German.
During WW1, Poirot left Belgium for England as a refugee from the Nazi invasion of Belgium, which provides him with insights into people's struggles and hardships. Historically, those Belgian refugees faced prejudice. The early stories show Poirot has a limp which eventually goes away, thus it might have been an injury from WW1 that heals over time.
Focus:
Poirot is also known for his deductive reasoning skills but additionally his detective work involves psychological insights. He's also Catholic (occasional mentions of going to church and an occasional moral dilemma) which gives him other insights about human nature which are absent in the Holmes' universe.
He knows how to “read” people and draw conclusions not just from what suspects are saying but how they say them.
He is a good conversationalist with people skills, and gets suspects talking fairly easily. Poirot pays attention to how subjects act and he scrutinizes their body language to tune into parts of their story that have holes.
General Sleuthing Style:
Poirot left a job as a Belgian Police Detective ("one of the most celebrated members of the Belgian police" per The Mysterious Affair at Styles) and in The Double Clue it says he was actually the Chief of Police of Brussels, so he understands police work, their procedures, and what they face and he follows a police detective's methods.
By this time in the world, forensic techniques had been introduced and policework was becoming more scientific and disciplined. Thus, Poirot's going beyond the forensics of how-it-was-done to include why-it-was done to increase the challenge to readers with more complexity.
Relationships:
Poirot had a trusty sidekick and partner named Captain Arthur Hastings who was a former Army Officer in the British military. Hastings is brave yet a little naive and maybe isn’t quick with connections, but Poirot appreciates him while they’re working a case as Hastings often unwittingly assists in discussion with suspects so Poirot is able to spy the lie and solve the mystery.
Poirot’s secretary, Miss Felicity Lemon, plays the role of female supporting character in Poirot's world. Miss Lemon is known for her precise nature and often assists Poirot by doing side research for certain cases. This is an interesting point since there is plenty of speculation about Holmes not having a high opinion of women yet Poirot has a woman regularly in his life that he trusts in his professional world.
On the point of women, Poirot also has a soft spot for Countess Vera Rossakoff, a jewel thief, when Hercule is investigating a jewel robbery in the short story The Double Clue. They meet in two more stories, The Big Four and The Capture of Cerberus, where she is then a nightclub owner. Christie's son has said that in his mother's notes she had felt Poirot knew he was too particular and fastidious for any woman to put-up with him.
Dr. Watson Vs Captain Hastings: Watson is a doctor and fits with Sherlock's science based approach and is likely more sympatico with the hero, but Capt Hastings is a true personal friend to Hercule firstly and aids him with his interactions with suspects. I always felt that Capt. Hastings was a great comfort and relieved some of Poirot's loneliness while Watson was more an assistant to Holmes. Capt Hastings and Poirot even vacation together as good friends which I don't see Holmes doing with Watson.
Conclusions: I think both characters were revolutionary for their time. If possible, I think that Poirot took what Sherlock had started with more scientific crime scene investigation and reasoning and expanded on it with basic criminal psychology that was a growing field of that time. The insights into human nature in addition to deductive reasoning is a powerful combination for a detective.
Both characters were handicapped in the personal relationship arena, but Sherlock seems more so than Poirot. Agatha Christie provided more personal background for Hercule than we have for Sherlock other than some tidbits about Mycroft, which makes Poirot more rounded in my humble opinion with Miss Lemon and Capt Hastings.
Also, Poirot has many moments of relating to people on a personal level that I think is missing with Sherlock. Case in point, Peril at End House shows Poirot on vacation and upon meeting a young heiress he becomes concerned that somebody is trying to kill her as she has had a number of near deadly accidents. Nobody seeks him out nor hires him, but he inserts himself into her life to investigate because of his concern for her.
Additionally, Poirot has a soft spot for children and their innocence that is touched on occasionally which I don't believe Holmes ever has such a softness towards his young homeless Baker Street Irregulars who "go everywhere and hear everything" and he pays them but shows no personal feelings towards them outside of their usefulness.
What do you think? As I said, I'm no expert on either character. How do they compare to you? Share your thoughts in the comments please.
