Scan barcode
scarletgarden70's review
2.0
When any author other than Arthur Conan Doyle takes on the character of Sherlock Holmes, they must remember exactly who they are dealing with. Sherlock Holmes is, without a doubt, one of the greatest characters in literary history and he must be treated as such. The key to a good Holmes spin-off is remaining true to his brilliant character while adding your own unique flavor. In a sense, "The Mandala of Sherlock Holmes" is successful in this respect. In fact, many of Holmes' lines in the novel are exact copies of some of his most famous lines from the original stories. This gives readers an irrevocable sense of Holmes, but it does little to inspire a sense of originality or intrigue. Holmes' incredibly rich character ends up being one-dimensional, something that the great detective should never be reduced to.
That being said, the story does fill in Holmes' missing years in India and Tibet with a case that is both intriguing and full of suspense. After thwarting his greatest adversary, Professor Moriarty, and faking his own demise, Holmes travels to India to seek solace while at the same time attempting to destroy the last threads of Moriarty's crime syndicate. It quickly becomes clear that such an undertaking is no simple feat and Holmes finds himself knee deep in dangerous attempts on his life.
This sounds like the premise of a great mystery with limitless potential and, for the most part, the mystery holds up to these high expectations. Unfortunately, as the mystery comes to an end, everything goes downhill. Holmes is and always has been about logic and reasoning. Every one of his cases, no matter how fantastical they may seem at first, comes to a satisfying, cohesive, and logical conclusion. Not so in "The Mandala of Sherlock Holmes." This mystery's ending is so bizarre and unbelievable that, in the neat, reasonable world of Holmes, it becomes ridiculous. In another mystery with another detective, the magical and somewhat mystic conclusion could be feasible, but with Holmes, it simply does not work.
Overall, though, the novel is not bad. A vast majority of it is exciting and true to Holmes' character. The absurd ending knocks the value of the book down several stars but, as an addition to the Holmes repertoire, it does have some significance.
That being said, the story does fill in Holmes' missing years in India and Tibet with a case that is both intriguing and full of suspense. After thwarting his greatest adversary, Professor Moriarty, and faking his own demise, Holmes travels to India to seek solace while at the same time attempting to destroy the last threads of Moriarty's crime syndicate. It quickly becomes clear that such an undertaking is no simple feat and Holmes finds himself knee deep in dangerous attempts on his life.
This sounds like the premise of a great mystery with limitless potential and, for the most part, the mystery holds up to these high expectations. Unfortunately, as the mystery comes to an end, everything goes downhill. Holmes is and always has been about logic and reasoning. Every one of his cases, no matter how fantastical they may seem at first, comes to a satisfying, cohesive, and logical conclusion. Not so in "The Mandala of Sherlock Holmes." This mystery's ending is so bizarre and unbelievable that, in the neat, reasonable world of Holmes, it becomes ridiculous. In another mystery with another detective, the magical and somewhat mystic conclusion could be feasible, but with Holmes, it simply does not work.
Overall, though, the novel is not bad. A vast majority of it is exciting and true to Holmes' character. The absurd ending knocks the value of the book down several stars but, as an addition to the Holmes repertoire, it does have some significance.
mtreads's review
3.0
This book is okay.
First, I want to point out that this book was packed with a lot of information about Tibet, Buddhism, etc... I think this detective story, while slow at times, was an engaging way to learn about another culture & political world that beforehand I had no clue about. So, I think there's a lot to take away...enough to keep this book above the 2-star mark.
As for, well, everything else. It was decent I suppose. There are cliches and narrative twists I felt weren't executed properly. Instead, some plot points felt inconsistent or off-beat somehow. Still, Sherlock Holmes is a lively character and he always managed to pull me back into the plot. As for the Babu, he and his crush on Holmes were fine. (Seriously, the guy was in love with him...but, I mean, who wouldn't? This is big brain Holmes we're talking about.) I will say, the references to Kim made this so much more interesting. It's kinda funny actually that the hints towards Kim made me light up more than the actual mystery in the book. Ah well.
Also, I enjoy that this book explores the spiritual side of Holmes. He's usually a character employed for his wit, so it was refreshing to see this aloof man reflect on the meaning of his existence. I just wish the story gave us a bit more of that, so the ending didn't feel so disproportionate to the rest of the story.
If you want a mindblowing detective story, this might not satisfy you. Except, I don't think that's the sole purpose of this book. Yes, the mystery is fine, but it's the spiritual matters of this book that make it interesting. It's a decent read if you've read some Sherlock Holmes and Kim. However, if you aren't aware of the references in this book, it might bore you.
First, I want to point out that this book was packed with a lot of information about Tibet, Buddhism, etc... I think this detective story, while slow at times, was an engaging way to learn about another culture & political world that beforehand I had no clue about. So, I think there's a lot to take away...enough to keep this book above the 2-star mark.
As for, well, everything else. It was decent I suppose. There are cliches and narrative twists I felt weren't executed properly. Instead, some plot points felt inconsistent or off-beat somehow. Still, Sherlock Holmes is a lively character and he always managed to pull me back into the plot. As for the Babu, he and his crush on Holmes were fine. (Seriously, the guy was in love with him...but, I mean, who wouldn't? This is big brain Holmes we're talking about.) I will say, the references to Kim made this so much more interesting. It's kinda funny actually that the hints towards Kim made me light up more than the actual mystery in the book. Ah well.
Also, I enjoy that this book explores the spiritual side of Holmes. He's usually a character employed for his wit, so it was refreshing to see this aloof man reflect on the meaning of his existence. I just wish the story gave us a bit more of that, so the ending didn't feel so disproportionate to the rest of the story.
If you want a mindblowing detective story, this might not satisfy you. Except, I don't think that's the sole purpose of this book. Yes, the mystery is fine, but it's the spiritual matters of this book that make it interesting. It's a decent read if you've read some Sherlock Holmes and Kim. However, if you aren't aware of the references in this book, it might bore you.
archytas's review
4.5
From the moment I heard that Tibetan Independence leader Jamyung Norbu was the author of one of the most well-regarded post-Conan Doyle Sherlock Holmes novels - set, of course - in the missing Tibet years, I knew I was going to read it. To discover that Norbu had placed Rudyard Kipling's Huree Mookerjee in the role of Watsonian narrator was just icing on the cake. The book did not disappoint: Norbu is every bit as good at capturing Arthur Conan-Doyle's voice as his reputation suggested. This is a really *good* Holmesian novel, which is yet being told from a Tibetan perspective. And yes, that really is both incredibly odd and totally natural.
It isn't just the Sherlockiana which is brilliantly done: Mookerjee's dash of Kipling adventure and intrigue suits the tone perfectly. Holmes in the British Raj, ably supported by a Bengali Gentleman spy, all just ... works. The book blends adventure fiction tropes into the detective fiction tropes, which makes the tonal shift to the Himalayas relatively smooth. Inevitably, the book explores rationalism, the enlightenment and the world that fueled both Arthur Conan Doyle and Kipling's worldview. Especially, this moment in time when scientific and spiritualist ideas had no clear boundary between them. It is clear from the reviews here that many feel the explicit Tibetan Buddhist religious elements to this plot are a big break from the tradition, but I'm not so sure. I'm not really a fan of the science/mystical pastiche featured here, but frankly, Conan Doyle was, and Holmesian novels always hovered on the edge. And the delight of having Sherlock's arrogance drain away as he admits to his less-than-proficient approach to the spiritual, is again, wonderfully evoked in a way that feels very true to the character. The book hardly moves away from the rigid deduction approach - Norbu proves a master at devising and then resolving devilish plots - but it exposes the underlying philosophical debates, before claiming them for Tibetan stories. Even the structure - where Holmes is the innovator against our protagonist's conventionality, works, but with the twist of Holmes as the foreigner in a strange land.
The approach to imperialism is similar. Mookerjee certainly faces more explicit racism than I remember Kipling acknowledging, but this is a surprisingly positive gloss on the Raj (although I can't imagine it is a spoiler to point out that the Chinese Empire is, of course, the Big Bad here). But this is a reimagining of the Europeans from the perspective of their occupied, and somehow, those stories have changed ownership. It reminds me of Cathy Park Hong's essay on broken English, and how English has gone beyond the property of England - and become a globally owned language. So too, have the stories of England become the cultural property of Indians and Tibetans. It's all just interesting and cool. The climax of the plot revolves around Mookerjee's clever use of an umbrella. In a Tibetan arctic environment.
But to be clear - this is *not* a highbrow book. This is, basically, Sherlock Holmes done faithfully and extraordinarily well, with a big twist of adventure novel to finish up. It won't be the most memorable book I read this year, but the experience was pure fun.
(Also, it is very hard to get hold of. Took me months. Someone should reprint!)
It isn't just the Sherlockiana which is brilliantly done: Mookerjee's dash of Kipling adventure and intrigue suits the tone perfectly. Holmes in the British Raj, ably supported by a Bengali Gentleman spy, all just ... works. The book blends adventure fiction tropes into the detective fiction tropes, which makes the tonal shift to the Himalayas relatively smooth. Inevitably, the book explores rationalism, the enlightenment and the world that fueled both Arthur Conan Doyle and Kipling's worldview. Especially, this moment in time when scientific and spiritualist ideas had no clear boundary between them. It is clear from the reviews here that many feel the explicit Tibetan Buddhist religious elements to this plot are a big break from the tradition, but I'm not so sure. I'm not really a fan of the science/mystical pastiche featured here, but frankly, Conan Doyle was, and Holmesian novels always hovered on the edge. And the delight of having Sherlock's arrogance drain away as he admits to his less-than-proficient approach to the spiritual, is again, wonderfully evoked in a way that feels very true to the character. The book hardly moves away from the rigid deduction approach - Norbu proves a master at devising and then resolving devilish plots - but it exposes the underlying philosophical debates, before claiming them for Tibetan stories. Even the structure - where Holmes is the innovator against our protagonist's conventionality, works, but with the twist of Holmes as the foreigner in a strange land.
The approach to imperialism is similar. Mookerjee certainly faces more explicit racism than I remember Kipling acknowledging, but this is a surprisingly positive gloss on the Raj (although I can't imagine it is a spoiler to point out that the Chinese Empire is, of course, the Big Bad here). But this is a reimagining of the Europeans from the perspective of their occupied, and somehow, those stories have changed ownership. It reminds me of Cathy Park Hong's essay on broken English, and how English has gone beyond the property of England - and become a globally owned language. So too, have the stories of England become the cultural property of Indians and Tibetans. It's all just interesting and cool. The climax of the plot revolves around Mookerjee's clever use of an umbrella. In a Tibetan arctic environment.
But to be clear - this is *not* a highbrow book. This is, basically, Sherlock Holmes done faithfully and extraordinarily well, with a big twist of adventure novel to finish up. It won't be the most memorable book I read this year, but the experience was pure fun.
(Also, it is very hard to get hold of. Took me months. Someone should reprint!)
mphdp's review against another edition
3.0
Ce livre se propose de combler les trous dans la vie de Sherlock Holmes, expliquant quelques évènements du grand hiatus. Nous suivons donc le détective en Inde et au Tibet accompagné de Huree Chunder Mookerjee, espion et savant bengali, dans des aventures sortant quelques peu de l'ordinaire !
Ce livre est une sorte de croisement entre deux univers littéraires : d'un côté l’œuvre de Sir Arthur Conan Doyle et de l'autre celle de Rudyard Kipling, d'où provient le narrateur de l'histoire à savoir Huree. Nous plongeons dans l'Inde coloniale et dans le Tibet mystique, c'est franchement dépaysant !
Ce livre est une sorte de croisement entre deux univers littéraires : d'un côté l’œuvre de Sir Arthur Conan Doyle et de l'autre celle de Rudyard Kipling, d'où provient le narrateur de l'histoire à savoir Huree. Nous plongeons dans l'Inde coloniale et dans le Tibet mystique, c'est franchement dépaysant !
eak1013's review
3.0
Alas. Alas and alack. The first half, three-quarters of this novel were awesome, a really lovely pastiche, maybe the best I've read so far, and the last few chapters veered off into an entirely different story that I was far less inclined to enjoy.
Holmes in India, with an Indian scholar-spy filling the role of Watson yet not trying to be Watson oh frabjous day, a cracking good mystery, all sorts of atmospherics - A+A+A+. A real treat to read, especially hard on the heels of the Russellian [b:The Game|8611377|The Game (Mary Russell, #7)|Laurie R. King|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51skBxnqx2L._SL75_.jpg|74673], with a similar heavy dollop of [a:Rudyard Kipling|6989|Rudyard Kipling|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1183237590p2/6989.jpg]'s [b:Kim|210834|Kim|Rudyard Kipling|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51D2NX0Z4AL._SL75_.jpg|1512424], but for once with an Indian narrator - a slightly different, very welcome perspective. Lovely. The way the author plays with the narrative voice and dialogue is a delight.
And there were footnotes.
Then. Then. Um.
Spoilers for the end.
Then the author chose to make Holmes the reincarnation of a Tibetan monk, battling a not-quite-dead Moriarty, who was in fact an evil Tibetan monk before the monk-later-known-as-Holmes, um, brain-zapped him to stop his evil ways, leaving him drastically wounded psychically and convinced he was English. The final battle was all about Moriarty attacking Holmes (and the Dalai Lama) with a magic stone while Holmes fought him off with powerful mudras.
And, okay, I'm totally all about taking a classic story, a classic character and recasting that story/character in another culture, another history. It's a remix! I love remixes! Which is why I loved the first chunk of this book so much. New setting! Everything seen through a new prism! Lovely!
But in the context of all of the reincarnation and Buddhist warrior magic, Holmes at one point rushes to the rescue of the Dalai Lama because he "just knows" the lama is in danger.
Just. Knows.
Explicitly states he has no evidence but is going only on gut feeling and certainty.
Which is ultimately explained by his reincarnated/soul transferred/magic Buddhist warrior status, but that's the point at which it stopped being a Sherlock Holmes story for me. The whole point of Holmes is that he never "just knows." Reading a Holmes story should be a rollicking adventure, driven by a dash of crazy logic. Sure, there can be an epic showdown in a deserted temple beneath a glacier, and I'll even give you a supernatural battle for the climax and conclusion, but for me, at least some part of that battle should be a battle of wits. A battle of figuring things out. And as much as I loved Moriarty getting taken down by Huree's umbrella, Holmes's suddenly-revealed superpowers just threw me right out.
(Seriously. There is a point at which, during a moment of danger and crisis, one of the monks begs Holmes to "remember who you are!", at which point he does, and magical shenanigans ensue. It verged on Neo's "I know kung fu.")
I've got no problem with the political message or the spiritual content or weaving Holmes into the history of Tibet. I've got no beef with Sherlock Holmes suddenly plunged into a supernatural world, even with his own supernatural powers. But when those supernatural powers are suddenly more important than Sherlock Holmes being, y'know, Sherlock Holmes, then you lose my delight as a reader.
And, oh my god, how did I go from being an idly interested reader of Sherlock Holmes a year ago to someone who has intense. feelings. about the very essence of the character and what he means? I blame you, [a:Laurie R. King|6760|Laurie R. King|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1269062114p2/6760.jpg]. I blame you, [a:Steven Moffat] and [a:Mark Gatiss|74861|Mark Gatiss|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1289072440p2/74861.jpg]. And, yes, I must blame you, too, [a:Arthur Conan Doyle|2448|Arthur Conan Doyle|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1289836561p2/2448.jpg]. ::shakes fist::
ETA: I've figured it out. My problem is that this book fails to adhere to the oath of the Detection Club: "Do you promise that your detectives shall well and truly detect the crimes presented to them using those wits which it may please you to bestow upon them and not placing reliance on nor making use of Divine Revelation, Feminine Intuition, Mumbo Jumbo, Jiggery-Pokery, Coincidence, or Act of God?" I assumed I was reading a novel that adhered to these standards, so the Divine Revelation took me by (unpleasant) surprise.
Ah, leave it to [a:Dorothy Sayers|8734|Dorothy L. Sayers|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1206564934p2/8734.jpg] to hit the nail on the head. Jiggery-Pokery, indeed.
Holmes in India, with an Indian scholar-spy filling the role of Watson yet not trying to be Watson oh frabjous day, a cracking good mystery, all sorts of atmospherics - A+A+A+. A real treat to read, especially hard on the heels of the Russellian [b:The Game|8611377|The Game (Mary Russell, #7)|Laurie R. King|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51skBxnqx2L._SL75_.jpg|74673], with a similar heavy dollop of [a:Rudyard Kipling|6989|Rudyard Kipling|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1183237590p2/6989.jpg]'s [b:Kim|210834|Kim|Rudyard Kipling|http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51D2NX0Z4AL._SL75_.jpg|1512424], but for once with an Indian narrator - a slightly different, very welcome perspective. Lovely. The way the author plays with the narrative voice and dialogue is a delight.
And there were footnotes.
Then. Then. Um.
Spoilers for the end.
Then the author chose to make Holmes the reincarnation of a Tibetan monk, battling a not-quite-dead Moriarty, who was in fact an evil Tibetan monk before the monk-later-known-as-Holmes, um, brain-zapped him to stop his evil ways, leaving him drastically wounded psychically and convinced he was English. The final battle was all about Moriarty attacking Holmes (and the Dalai Lama) with a magic stone while Holmes fought him off with powerful mudras.
And, okay, I'm totally all about taking a classic story, a classic character and recasting that story/character in another culture, another history. It's a remix! I love remixes! Which is why I loved the first chunk of this book so much. New setting! Everything seen through a new prism! Lovely!
But in the context of all of the reincarnation and Buddhist warrior magic, Holmes at one point rushes to the rescue of the Dalai Lama because he "just knows" the lama is in danger.
Just. Knows.
Explicitly states he has no evidence but is going only on gut feeling and certainty.
Which is ultimately explained by his reincarnated/soul transferred/magic Buddhist warrior status, but that's the point at which it stopped being a Sherlock Holmes story for me. The whole point of Holmes is that he never "just knows." Reading a Holmes story should be a rollicking adventure, driven by a dash of crazy logic. Sure, there can be an epic showdown in a deserted temple beneath a glacier, and I'll even give you a supernatural battle for the climax and conclusion, but for me, at least some part of that battle should be a battle of wits. A battle of figuring things out. And as much as I loved Moriarty getting taken down by Huree's umbrella, Holmes's suddenly-revealed superpowers just threw me right out.
(Seriously. There is a point at which, during a moment of danger and crisis, one of the monks begs Holmes to "remember who you are!", at which point he does, and magical shenanigans ensue. It verged on Neo's "I know kung fu.")
I've got no problem with the political message or the spiritual content or weaving Holmes into the history of Tibet. I've got no beef with Sherlock Holmes suddenly plunged into a supernatural world, even with his own supernatural powers. But when those supernatural powers are suddenly more important than Sherlock Holmes being, y'know, Sherlock Holmes, then you lose my delight as a reader.
And, oh my god, how did I go from being an idly interested reader of Sherlock Holmes a year ago to someone who has intense. feelings. about the very essence of the character and what he means? I blame you, [a:Laurie R. King|6760|Laurie R. King|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1269062114p2/6760.jpg]. I blame you, [a:Steven Moffat] and [a:Mark Gatiss|74861|Mark Gatiss|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1289072440p2/74861.jpg]. And, yes, I must blame you, too, [a:Arthur Conan Doyle|2448|Arthur Conan Doyle|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1289836561p2/2448.jpg]. ::shakes fist::
ETA: I've figured it out. My problem is that this book fails to adhere to the oath of the Detection Club: "Do you promise that your detectives shall well and truly detect the crimes presented to them using those wits which it may please you to bestow upon them and not placing reliance on nor making use of Divine Revelation, Feminine Intuition, Mumbo Jumbo, Jiggery-Pokery, Coincidence, or Act of God?" I assumed I was reading a novel that adhered to these standards, so the Divine Revelation took me by (unpleasant) surprise.
Ah, leave it to [a:Dorothy Sayers|8734|Dorothy L. Sayers|http://photo.goodreads.com/authors/1206564934p2/8734.jpg] to hit the nail on the head. Jiggery-Pokery, indeed.
More...