Scan barcode
gailbird's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
emotional
funny
hopeful
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.75
You gotta love Doyle introducing characters in very specific ways and then completely shifting them in the very second installment—Watson says he got shot in the shoulder in A Study in Scarlet, hello sequel wherein it is said he got shot in the leg. And after Watson says he ruled out Holmes using narcotics because “the temperance and cleanliness of his whole life [forbade] such a notion,” he opens the next story with, roughly, “Sike! Holmes has been alternately shooting up morphine and cocaine three times every day for months and I’m getting annoyed with both it and him.” I guess it keeps things dynamic.
Anyway, at the beginning, Holmes is essentially out of work, and presumably has been for the amount of time he’s been using narcotics daily, when Miss Mary Morstan enters the scene. She tantalizes Holmes with the cerebral intrigue of her mystery, and Watson with the romantic intrigue of her femininity. And, yes, it is just about that melodramatic. Because The Sign of Four has a romantic subplot that is so sudden and idealistic that the main obstacle between the two is the looming shadow of an inherited fortune—that hasn’t materialized yet. Sure, it was a different time when class and wealth disparities where a bigger issue of “honour” and whatnot, but really, it was a rather underwhelming reason for tension. But we already know that Watson is an excitable, romantic fellow. He literally goes off on Holmes because Holmes says he “didn’t notice” Mary was good-looking. Why does Watson care if someone else thinks she’s stunning? It speaks more about Watson’s state of mind than anything negative about Holmes. Holmes just gets demonized for pointing this aspect of Watson’s personality out when he critiques the “romance” Watson made of the first case he was on with him. And that, really, boils down to a matter of taste, so you can’t hold that against Holmes either—remember how bitterly Watson rated Holmes’ article in the first book? Dr. Watson's very words were, I quote, “What ineffable twaddle! I never read such rubbish in my life!” So, really, Holmes’ critique of Watson’s writing isn’t that awful.
I personally appreciate the writing of Doyle, as Watson. He has a great turn for painting an atmospheric scene with words. This mystery has some of the most memorable settings—the London streets, Pondicherry Lodge, the docks. And of course the backstory in India and the prison island. It’s a more gripping mystery than A Study in Scarlet because it’s harder to track down the perpetrators—though it is fairly obvious early on who they are—and the chase scene on the river is intense. The backstory of the treasure and the members who represented the Sign of Four, along with the Morstan connection, was interesting from the point of view of the man who had been cheated out of it and was willing to go to any lengths to recover his right, both for himself and the other three members of the Sign. It certainly highlights the murky territory of British Imperialism, foreign interventions, prisons, and general oppression that is easily exercised over those in less powerful positions. The eventual fate of the treasure seems fitting in light of events.
Anyway, at the beginning, Holmes is essentially out of work, and presumably has been for the amount of time he’s been using narcotics daily, when Miss Mary Morstan enters the scene. She tantalizes Holmes with the cerebral intrigue of her mystery, and Watson with the romantic intrigue of her femininity. And, yes, it is just about that melodramatic. Because The Sign of Four has a romantic subplot that is so sudden and idealistic that the main obstacle between the two is the looming shadow of an inherited fortune—that hasn’t materialized yet. Sure, it was a different time when class and wealth disparities where a bigger issue of “honour” and whatnot, but really, it was a rather underwhelming reason for tension. But we already know that Watson is an excitable, romantic fellow. He literally goes off on Holmes because Holmes says he “didn’t notice” Mary was good-looking. Why does Watson care if someone else thinks she’s stunning? It speaks more about Watson’s state of mind than anything negative about Holmes. Holmes just gets demonized for pointing this aspect of Watson’s personality out when he critiques the “romance” Watson made of the first case he was on with him. And that, really, boils down to a matter of taste, so you can’t hold that against Holmes either—remember how bitterly Watson rated Holmes’ article in the first book? Dr. Watson's very words were, I quote, “What ineffable twaddle! I never read such rubbish in my life!” So, really, Holmes’ critique of Watson’s writing isn’t that awful.
I personally appreciate the writing of Doyle, as Watson. He has a great turn for painting an atmospheric scene with words. This mystery has some of the most memorable settings—the London streets, Pondicherry Lodge, the docks. And of course the backstory in India and the prison island. It’s a more gripping mystery than A Study in Scarlet because it’s harder to track down the perpetrators—though it is fairly obvious early on who they are—and the chase scene on the river is intense. The backstory of the treasure and the members who represented the Sign of Four, along with the Morstan connection, was interesting from the point of view of the man who had been cheated out of it and was willing to go to any lengths to recover his right, both for himself and the other three members of the Sign. It certainly highlights the murky territory of British Imperialism, foreign interventions, prisons, and general oppression that is easily exercised over those in less powerful positions. The eventual fate of the treasure seems fitting in light of events.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Drug use, Death, Confinement, and Murder
Moderate: Blood, Racism, and Racial slurs
Minor: Cannibalism
oliviasbooks's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
dark
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
This is the second installment of Sherlock Holmes and honestly I wasn't impressed. The story was interesting enough to keep me reading but not at an enthusiastic pace. What really put me off this book was the horrendous racism throughout. I was disgusted with the offensive language used. I am aware that they were accepted views of the time but I think Doyle's racism went beyond the average Joe Bob's racism. Just when you think it can't get much worse he starts to describe a character in the most inhumane way. I may give The hounds a try as I am reading them as part of a readalong but if the racism persists I 'm not sure I will be comfortable reading more. These books should not be promoted in our culture, we have no time for racists, no matter what time they lived in.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Racism, Racial slurs, Religious bigotry, Xenophobia, and Misogyny
More...