Doing Nothing With A Plot

“The Dartmoor Horror” by Joe DeSantis is a Sherlock Holmes novel which does include supernatural aspects within the story. It is also an unofficial sequel to “The Hound of the Baskervilles”. This is not about how supernatural elements can’t be introduced into a Sherlock Holmes story. I’ve seen that done very well in other books (look out for a deep dive on one of those soon). It’s about the way in which the supernatural elements are used — a way that makes them surplus to requirements.

There will be spoilers in this post! I can’t discuss the plot threads without talking about what is happening.

The main plot of the story is sound. Jack Stapleton (the lost child of the lost Baskerville brother) has survived the events of “The Hound of the Baskervilles” — which would be possible, as he is lost in the Grimpen Mire, so there’s no body. Stapleton, who knew the mire like the back of his hand, might very well have made it to the tin mine in the middle and hidden from the authorities there. He’s still after the Baskerville fortune, which also makes sense, although I’m not quite sure how he would have claimed it after Sir Henry’s death (Costa Rica was mentioned, though). Stapleton has an assistant in Murphy, a character mentioned as being shady and knowledgeable about the moor in the original book. That, too, pans out.
The romance sub-plot between Sir Henry and Laura Lyons also works out. While it’s not the most natural thing for them to connect, it’s still believable and well-handled. With both of those plot threads working as they should, the whole novel is standing on solid feet. Both of these threads also don’t need any supernatural element to work, as you might already have noticed.

Now for the supernatural elements. Keep in mind that the original novel had a supposedly supernatural element in the hound already, but made it turn out to be something natural instead (a specific dog breed which Stapleton had bought and trained). The basic possibility of using supernatural elements in a sequel is there. After all, the story of Sir Henry and the hound has a scientific background, but there’s still Sir Hugo being killed by a Hellhound centuries earlier.
The Hellhound is back in the sequel, this time as a real, physical creature which, in an interesting twist of fate, becomes a guardian and protector for Sir Henry. Yet, I can see how that would work out if used well.
The second element is an ancient bog witch who is raised by Murphy with his grandmother’s help (Murphy has been exiled from his clan, but is still Romany) and who apparently was alive at the time of Sir Hugo already. She is the more unnecessary of the two elements, as there’s nothing she does which can’t be done without her.

The Hellhound could work nicely within the narrative. It has been around to ‘punish’ evil members of the Baskerville family before, from Sir Hugo onwards. This is hinted at in “The Hound of the Baskervilles” already where several strange deaths on the moor are mentioned. Yet, if the hound kills the evil Baskervilles, why should it not also protect a good one?
Within the story, Sir Henry does a lot of good for the nearby towns and villages, taking care of the repairs to the local church and having specialists do repair work on the local roads. For a poor community living in the middle of a large moor, that is certainly a blessing. He also treats the hound well when it comes to him, starving and injured. This is what wins the hound’s loyalty and proves he’s worthy of its protection.
In addition, Stapleton is a Baskerville as well (otherwise the main plot would make no sense) and certainly one on a level with Sir Hugo himself. By protecting his new friend, the hound could very well also return to its job of punishing the evil members of the family.
In a better use of the hound, it would come to Sir Henry’s aide in the big climax and either kill Stapleton like it killed Sir Hugo or at least drag him into a bog in plain view of others, so it is clear this time around that he’s really dead. That is not what happens, though.

Unlike the Hellhound, the bog witch has no practical use within the story. I personally always approve of a little necromancy on the side, but there is no reason to have the witch there. She does nothing which no other established character could be doing instead.
In the story, the witch kills two people, one by luring him into the bog (which is what she enjoyed doing before she died in that bog herself) and one in a more direct way (presumably by strangling or breaking his neck, the audience doesn’t ‘see’ the death). Yet, before she’s raised from the bog, Stapleton has already committed two murders himself. He’s not shy of doing it and he’s certainly capable of it, too. He doesn’t need the witch to do his dirty work, as he’s perfectly capable of doing it himself. In addition, one of the witch’s two victims (two more are suggested, but it’s not clear whether she’s killed them, too) is superfluous and the other one could just as well have been waylaid and killed by Stapleton.
Frankland, Laura Lyons’ estranged father, is lured off the track on his way back home after telling Laura he doesn’t approve of her divorce and new engagement to Sir Henry. He is lured into the bog and sinks slowly while the bog witch watches. Apart from how that is not how swamps and bogs work, there is no reason why Stapleton on his own or with the help of Murphy couldn’t just overpower Frankland and put him in the bog. The end result would be the same.
The second victim, the superfluous one, is an old man who has seen Murphy move about on the moor at night, mostly to bring Stapleton food and water and to get his marching orders from his boss. This character is never mentioned before, he has not caught Sherlock Holmes’ eye already, and his murder is not noted in any way. His death has no influence whatsoever on the outcome of the story. This murder is pointless and unnecessary and should simply have been left out.
With that, the witch has completely lost her use for the story. Her first victim could just as well have been killed by Stapleton (who murdered with his own hands before already) and the second victim could simply have been left out completely.
In the end, the bog witch tries to kill Sir Henry and the Hellhound comes to his aide, grabbing the witch and bearing her into the bog. The hound could just as well have done that with Stapleton. Stapleton is again fleeing into the Grimpen Mire and supposed to have been killed when taking a misstep after Holmes has moved his new markers. To be honest, I would have preferred a confirmed death the second time.

Unfortunately, “The Dartmoor Horror” is a good example of how not to do supernatural elements in a story. The Hellhound and the witch cancel each other out and become pretty superfluous that way. The Hellhound could have been a nice addition to the story, a nod to the legend which is read out to Holmes at the beginning of “The Hound of the Baskervilles”, but it hasn’t been used that way. The witch isn’t needed in a story where the villain has already proven he’s able to kill before she’s even raised. She is neither a tool for the villain nor a mentor or other useful helper.