Scan barcode
naluju's review against another edition
adventurous
informative
mysterious
relaxing
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
5.0
Reread, 1st in series,London 1894, detective duo,
bigs2021's review against another edition
4.0
Pretty good approximation of Sherlock Holmes. I liked it and it was an easy read with good pacing. It lacks a certain je ne sais quoi, however… not sure I’ll continue on.
alidottie's review against another edition
4.0
Wonderful mystery recommended to me years ago by I don't know whom. I'm just glad I finally read it!
ladyethyme's review against another edition
3.0
As many reviewers have already stated, it is a clear copy of the Sherlock Holmes formula, complete with eccentric detective and companion.
Although unlike some of the other reviewers, I don’t hold that specifically against it. I think it’s a wonderful formula, and if an author can extrapolate upon it with creativity and homage, I think it works just fine.
The issue I was having almost immediately are the anachronisms which are sprinkled throughout the text, as the author didn’t seem to think it relevant to do any historical research of the time in which he placed his story. He constantly makes reference to small things which didn’t exist.
Things such as the word “boyfriend“ were not in use as a young lady’s paramour until well into the 20th century, hair clips were not invented until the 1970s, and men’s trousers certainly did not have back pockets in which they kept “wallets” (an Anerican word at the time)… and certainly not in a suit.
The modern leather bi-fold wallet was created in the mid-1900s…like,1950.
Even in jeans back pockets were not introduced until after 1900. A man kept his billfold in the breast pocket of his coat, or a bag at his waist.
And the idea an English gentlemen would only bathe twice a month is….ludicrous. People still had noses and cared about hygiene. This writer probably thinks medieval people stank, too-given the poor level of research done. (No, they didn’t. If interested, Dr. Goodman has extensive practical knowledge outlined in her books).
No, Victorians didn’t smell
Although unlike some of the other reviewers, I don’t hold that specifically against it. I think it’s a wonderful formula, and if an author can extrapolate upon it with creativity and homage, I think it works just fine.
The issue I was having almost immediately are the anachronisms which are sprinkled throughout the text, as the author didn’t seem to think it relevant to do any historical research of the time in which he placed his story. He constantly makes reference to small things which didn’t exist.
Things such as the word “boyfriend“ were not in use as a young lady’s paramour until well into the 20th century, hair clips were not invented until the 1970s, and men’s trousers certainly did not have back pockets in which they kept “wallets” (an Anerican word at the time)… and certainly not in a suit.
The modern leather bi-fold wallet was created in the mid-1900s…like,1950.
Even in jeans back pockets were not introduced until after 1900. A man kept his billfold in the breast pocket of his coat, or a bag at his waist.
And the idea an English gentlemen would only bathe twice a month is….ludicrous. People still had noses and cared about hygiene. This writer probably thinks medieval people stank, too-given the poor level of research done. (No, they didn’t. If interested, Dr. Goodman has extensive practical knowledge outlined in her books).
No, Victorians didn’t smell
cariadreads's review against another edition
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
telerit's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
informative
mysterious
relaxing
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.25
rachelellyn's review against another edition
3.0
Really 3.5 - I enjoyed it. Historically a few things pulled me out of the story.
thornless_rose's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
mysterious
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0