You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Scan barcode
seolhe's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.0
dmcke013's review against another edition
4.0
"Come at once if convenient. If not convenient, come at once all the same - SH"
The final entry in [a:Arthur Conan Doyle|2448|Arthur Conan Doyle|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1495008883p2/2448.jpg]'s Sherlock Holmes canon, which - again - I experienced through a mixture of reading and listening to the Stephen Fry narrated Audible version, and which is also really once again a collection of short stories rather than a single over-arching narrative.
What is unique in this collection, though, is that some of the stories are presented as Holmes himself delivering the narrative, rather than Watson acting as the biographer.
I also noticed - perhaps reflecting the nature of the time in which they were written, and Doyle's own interests - that there are more of the, shall we say, supernatural elements in the case chosen ("The adventure of the Sussex Vampire" springs to mind, for example) although - in all cases - the supernatural elements are later debunked by Holmes himself.
As a whole? I thoroughly enjoyed my time in the company of Holmes and Watson.
The final entry in [a:Arthur Conan Doyle|2448|Arthur Conan Doyle|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1495008883p2/2448.jpg]'s Sherlock Holmes canon, which - again - I experienced through a mixture of reading and listening to the Stephen Fry narrated Audible version, and which is also really once again a collection of short stories rather than a single over-arching narrative.
What is unique in this collection, though, is that some of the stories are presented as Holmes himself delivering the narrative, rather than Watson acting as the biographer.
I also noticed - perhaps reflecting the nature of the time in which they were written, and Doyle's own interests - that there are more of the, shall we say, supernatural elements in the case chosen ("The adventure of the Sussex Vampire" springs to mind, for example) although - in all cases - the supernatural elements are later debunked by Holmes himself.
As a whole? I thoroughly enjoyed my time in the company of Holmes and Watson.
starwarrior91's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
mysterious
relaxing
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
thatgirlinblack's review against another edition
5.0
The same Sherlock Holmes as always! However, some of these mysteries are written in a different format, not narrated by the faithful Dr. Watson. A couple the famed detective himself pens. He has a more straightforward style of writing, as he himself admits. None of Watson's flowery prose or praise, just the facts. One is written in third-person, as Watson isn't there to observe, and Sherlock doesn't want to reveal the big secret till the end. And one story is set after Sherlock retires and concerns him helping solve a murder in his quiet seaside community. A most delightful bunch of stories.
nikikalyvides's review against another edition
Decided to read the first one instead
oliviaalice_199's review against another edition
adventurous
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
mo_mentan's review against another edition
3.0
the last 6 or so hours of a 75-hour-long sherlock holmes marathon read by steven fry.
i bet i can say now, after more than three whole days of listening to this, that i have tried to like sherlock holmes, and there were, indeed, things that i did enjoy, but i just never will love sherlock holmes nearly as much as some of his peers (miss marple > sherlock holmes anytime).
i talked to my mother a few days ago about why i just prefer everything christie writes over conan doyle's sherlock (i even prefer her short stories over conan doyle's i think, even though i prefer her novels over her short stories and for his it's the other way around). every single sherlock holmes story just has such an infuriating male gaze, such incredible chivalry, everything about it is conformative and upholds the status quo. the riddles are sometimes nice, but never as interesting as christie's and i feel less compelled to guess who dunnit. the clues are laid with much less precision and the characters - i think that is the most important point. with conan doyle, it is always, always, always the women's characterization that falls short. there is barely any, anyhow, they are simply sorted in class and then good and bad, and once he describes in which of these four categories the current character falls, it might well be any other woman from the same category, with very few exceptions. all his female characters always faint and are either very dumb or very beautiful, sometimes both, often they are trapped in horrible marriages with sadistic men and everyone feels sorry but no one really does anything for them, and holmes and watson don't seem to feel that there should be any social change whatsoever. then there is the racism (in this installment, which is the last and was published in the 1920ies!! the n-word is used and the black character is a simple caricature, not improved at all by fry's ridiculous voicing which i really hated) and especially the general, gruesome colonial perspective and patriotism, and, last but all but least, the ableism: not only are all disabled people always called invalids, no, it is made very obvious that even a simple facial anomaly makes a person basically not worth anything but quiet suffering (because, as perultimate story teaches us, suicide is veryvery bad and can never be done, says i-am-o-so-rational mr christian moralist holmes) and disability is a central theme in many stories apparently for nothing but a misled horror factor and a kind of bystander curiosity satisfacton for readers who have too little road accidents and heartless victorian circuses in their lives.
all in all: not a fan, some of it is interesting and i think it taught me a lot about victorian morals and why i should stop reading books by white men
i bet i can say now, after more than three whole days of listening to this, that i have tried to like sherlock holmes, and there were, indeed, things that i did enjoy, but i just never will love sherlock holmes nearly as much as some of his peers (miss marple > sherlock holmes anytime).
i talked to my mother a few days ago about why i just prefer everything christie writes over conan doyle's sherlock (i even prefer her short stories over conan doyle's i think, even though i prefer her novels over her short stories and for his it's the other way around). every single sherlock holmes story just has such an infuriating male gaze, such incredible chivalry, everything about it is conformative and upholds the status quo. the riddles are sometimes nice, but never as interesting as christie's and i feel less compelled to guess who dunnit. the clues are laid with much less precision and the characters - i think that is the most important point. with conan doyle, it is always, always, always the women's characterization that falls short. there is barely any, anyhow, they are simply sorted in class and then good and bad, and once he describes in which of these four categories the current character falls, it might well be any other woman from the same category, with very few exceptions. all his female characters always faint and are either very dumb or very beautiful, sometimes both, often they are trapped in horrible marriages with sadistic men and everyone feels sorry but no one really does anything for them, and holmes and watson don't seem to feel that there should be any social change whatsoever. then there is the racism (in this installment, which is the last and was published in the 1920ies!! the n-word is used and the black character is a simple caricature, not improved at all by fry's ridiculous voicing which i really hated) and especially the general, gruesome colonial perspective and patriotism, and, last but all but least, the ableism: not only are all disabled people always called invalids, no, it is made very obvious that even a simple facial anomaly makes a person basically not worth anything but quiet suffering (because, as perultimate story teaches us, suicide is veryvery bad and can never be done, says i-am-o-so-rational mr christian moralist holmes) and disability is a central theme in many stories apparently for nothing but a misled horror factor and a kind of bystander curiosity satisfacton for readers who have too little road accidents and heartless victorian circuses in their lives.
all in all: not a fan, some of it is interesting and i think it taught me a lot about victorian morals and why i should stop reading books by white men
samuel_kane_horrigan's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75