Reviews

The House of Silk, by Anthony Horowitz

ktburrichter's review

Go to review page

adventurous dark mysterious slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? N/A
  • Diverse cast of characters? No

3.5

denidax's review

Go to review page

5.0

Brilliant book! If I wouldn't have known that this wasn't one of Doyle's books, I honestly wouldn't have noticed.

I loved that the main character is Watson, as I find Holmes very annoying! The story was engaging and it kept me guessing until the end.

I think Mr Horowitz has officially become one of my favourite writers!

Update May 2020: listened to it for the second time, still as enjoyable as the first.

goldluula's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

When better to curl up with a Sherlock Holmes book than a wet afternoon?

Can I just congratulate Mr. Horowitz on yet another fantastical novel? Please? Because, I've read a lot of his books, and this one just blew me away :)

So, in The House of Silk, we return yet again to our favourite (possibly second favourite...) detective. I'm not going to write a short summary - there's a perfectly good one at the top of the page that you can read!

Horowitz did an amazing job of keeping the characters of Holmes and Watson as Conan Doyle had described them, and giving us a nice adventure.

There really was going to be more to the review than that, I just forgot it all...

Oh, and Mr. Horowitz? The Power of Five? We've been on tenterhooks for ages

nichola's review

Go to review page

3.0

Reread 05/08/2020

And my issues remain the same. Good lord I did not enjoy this. My previous points stand. Sherlock is smarter than this. But he is also purer. I think this book, as beautifully written as it was, just did a dirty deed to Sherlock. I feel like it made the narrative salacious for the sake of it.

I am however very keen to read Moriarty because I think Horowitz will have a much freer hand with that characterisation.




**Warning: this text may contain spoilers** Sherlock is smarter than this.

I just don't believe he would willingly entrap himself twice.

The story is also too similar to the Alienist by Caleb Carr, which I enjoyed much,much more.

I have yet to read a sequel or Holmes book that has not let me down. Perhaps I should just stop and appreciate what Doyle did.

eairwin's review against another edition

Go to review page

2.0

I like Anthony Horowitz and he does a good job capturing the voice of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
SpoilerThe final reveal, however, was so dark that my enjoyment of the book plummeted and tainted my entire experience.

charmaineclancy's review

Go to review page

5.0

I'm a big Sherlock Holmes fan and was a little dubious that any writer could capture the original characters' voice or if they even should try. Horowitz nailed the tone and voice of a classic Watson and Holmes mystery, once I got started I became lost in the story and forgot it was not penned by Sir Conan Doyle himself.

There is a slightly more contemporary feel to the story, which is probably found in the quickened pace and increase of quirky and snappy one-liners.

jenniferjuniper67's review

Go to review page

5.0

Well done!! Surprise twist at the end that I did not expect!

kriskross13's review

Go to review page

adventurous mysterious slow-paced

5.0

kjenn's review

Go to review page

4.0

Granted, it's been almost 20 years since my Sherlock Holmes phase, but I think Anthony Horowitz did a creditable job. He respected the original timeline, characters, narrative structure and voice. The plot was interesting, and even though it would have been a bit risque for Conan Doyle's time, it was handled delicately enough. My only criticism is that Holmes was a little too human. I'm used to a Holmes that's less than likable.

jazzlioness's review

Go to review page

2.0

I thought the end was clever but the topic too gruesome and depressing to be enjoyable. The writing is not very good both because Holmes looks foolish in several instances something Doyle would never have allowed and because some of the descriptions are lazy "the hallway was carpeted with flowered wallpaper." You don't carpet floors with wallpaper. There needs to be "and it had." There are several of these instances of bad proofing or odd descriptions. It felt like the author was trying to do way too much both with an axe to grind against to original and trying to incorporate references to say see, here I know my Holmes. There are so many better Holmes books than this one. Try Laurie R. King, Carole Nelson Douglass or Larry Millett to start.