Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.45 AVERAGE
4.45 AVERAGE
adventurous
informative
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
N/A
Loveable characters:
Yes
Going back to the entire collection of Sherlock Holmes was an absolute pleasure. Many of the stories are an all time favourite. Stephen Fry's reading took this experience up a notch.
adventurous
dark
mysterious
reflective
fast-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
my audible free trial was up and this was just too fucking long to finish but i enjoyed it (until they diverted from the story and ended up describing some guy in the desert for some reason? it was confusing)
adventurous
mysterious
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
No
So, I was going to summarize each story but realized that the book was over 1100 pages, and the stories have so many commonalities that reviewing each of them would just get redundant. Instead, I'm going to write a general review of the Holmes canon.
To start, I want to acknowledge that these stories are ground-breaking classics. Throughout the whole canon, Conan Doyle teaches us to pay attention to details, beware of red herrings, and be prepared to think about reality in unconventional ways. As I kept reading more and more of the stories, solving each mystery before Holmes explained the ending to me became a fun game. I would be excited when I won, and I would feel the satisfaction of a game well-played even when I lost.
The stories themselves are, for the most part, a lot of fun. There is generally some interesting combination of romance, adventure, sensationalism, and humor that make them engaging reads in addition to engaging mental puzzles. What I appreciate most about the stories is that they are firmly grounded in a scientific, plausible world and are still completely riveting (with the exception of The Adventure of the Creeping Man, which was my least favorite story in the collection).
I also absolutely loved the characterizations of Holmes and Watson. Over time, I developed a deep affection for these two men, who are both deeply good and deeply human. It is also moving to watch the love and friendship that develops between the two of them.
There is also something comforting in Conan Doyle's version of reality. He writes about a world where women and children are rarely killed (although they can be horribly victimized and tortured), where people generally get what they deserve, and where good generally outsmarts evil. It is a nice break from the real world (which is often so painfully different)to open a book and know that these rules almost always apply.
I think the only reason I cannot give Sherlock Holmes five stars is that the racism and sexism inherent in the books eventually began to grate on me. Much of this is that Conan Doyle was very much a white man firmly ensconced in Victorian England, and he wrote for his time (and not ahead of it). Women and people of color are almost entirely two-dimensional characters. The women are inevitably "beautiful", easily victimized, emotionally labile, and "intuitive" rather than "intelligent." Alternatively, they can be dangerous and treacherous seductresses, enraged and vengeful, or elderly and harmless. People of color tend to be characterized as less than human in the rare instances when they appear at all.
Conan Doyle was also evidently quite interested in eugenics, which I find distasteful (though I understand it was an interest of many educated people of the time period). I often found that my cringing at these kinds of things would take me away from the flow of the story and severely decrease my enjoyment.
Ultimately, however, I think it is hard to imagine the modern mystery genre without Sherlock Holmes, and I think this is an important series of short stories for people to read.
To start, I want to acknowledge that these stories are ground-breaking classics. Throughout the whole canon, Conan Doyle teaches us to pay attention to details, beware of red herrings, and be prepared to think about reality in unconventional ways. As I kept reading more and more of the stories, solving each mystery before Holmes explained the ending to me became a fun game. I would be excited when I won, and I would feel the satisfaction of a game well-played even when I lost.
The stories themselves are, for the most part, a lot of fun. There is generally some interesting combination of romance, adventure, sensationalism, and humor that make them engaging reads in addition to engaging mental puzzles. What I appreciate most about the stories is that they are firmly grounded in a scientific, plausible world and are still completely riveting (with the exception of The Adventure of the Creeping Man, which was my least favorite story in the collection).
I also absolutely loved the characterizations of Holmes and Watson. Over time, I developed a deep affection for these two men, who are both deeply good and deeply human. It is also moving to watch the love and friendship that develops between the two of them.
There is also something comforting in Conan Doyle's version of reality. He writes about a world where women and children are rarely killed (although they can be horribly victimized and tortured), where people generally get what they deserve, and where good generally outsmarts evil. It is a nice break from the real world (which is often so painfully different)to open a book and know that these rules almost always apply.
I think the only reason I cannot give Sherlock Holmes five stars is that the racism and sexism inherent in the books eventually began to grate on me. Much of this is that Conan Doyle was very much a white man firmly ensconced in Victorian England, and he wrote for his time (and not ahead of it). Women and people of color are almost entirely two-dimensional characters. The women are inevitably "beautiful", easily victimized, emotionally labile, and "intuitive" rather than "intelligent." Alternatively, they can be dangerous and treacherous seductresses, enraged and vengeful, or elderly and harmless. People of color tend to be characterized as less than human in the rare instances when they appear at all.
Conan Doyle was also evidently quite interested in eugenics, which I find distasteful (though I understand it was an interest of many educated people of the time period). I often found that my cringing at these kinds of things would take me away from the flow of the story and severely decrease my enjoyment.
Ultimately, however, I think it is hard to imagine the modern mystery genre without Sherlock Holmes, and I think this is an important series of short stories for people to read.
adventurous
emotional
funny
informative
mysterious
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I thought I had read most of the Sherlock Holmes stories, but there were a lot of stories in the Complete Sherlock Holmes that I had not read before. Still not sure I'll ever be able to reel off specific story lines and titles, but I thoroughly enjoyed this!
(I'll average the rating for whenever I finish all of the stories lol)
A Study in Scarlet: 3 stars, the mystery was interesting but we needed so much boring background that I didn't like it lol.
A Study in Scarlet: 3 stars, the mystery was interesting but we needed so much boring background that I didn't like it lol.
Pros:
- Just how can one person come up with so many so well thought-out stories?
- Some stories really stuck with me and make me want to reread them: The Five Orange Pips, The Red Headed League, The Blue Carbuncle, The Yellow Face, The Naval Treaty, The Sussex Vampire
- I also really liked The Dog of Baskervilles and the Valley of Fear
- I like how unbiased, unreligious and rather simple Doyle's writing style is in comparison to most Victorian writers. Even though there's still some challenge in it for me since English is not my native language.
Cons:
- In A Study in Scarlet I really disliked the heavy use of flashback-kind of storytelling. For some reason, I find reading flashbacks sort of distracting, tiresome and mostly unneeded.
- The Signs of Four also had this second part that was all flashback. Flashbacks really put me off haha xD Although in the Valley of Fear I thought the big flashback-like story was used masterfully since there was a BIG TWIST in it at the end that made me go like: 'Holy cow HE was the detective?!?'
- As I went through the short stories. Some stories became a bit predictable...or maybe I progressed in deducing from sentences haha
- Just how can one person come up with so many so well thought-out stories?
- Some stories really stuck with me and make me want to reread them: The Five Orange Pips, The Red Headed League, The Blue Carbuncle, The Yellow Face, The Naval Treaty, The Sussex Vampire
- I also really liked The Dog of Baskervilles and the Valley of Fear
- I like how unbiased, unreligious and rather simple Doyle's writing style is in comparison to most Victorian writers. Even though there's still some challenge in it for me since English is not my native language.
Cons:
- In A Study in Scarlet I really disliked the heavy use of flashback-kind of storytelling. For some reason, I find reading flashbacks sort of distracting, tiresome and mostly unneeded.
- The Signs of Four also had this second part that was all flashback. Flashbacks really put me off haha xD Although in the Valley of Fear I thought the big flashback-like story was used masterfully since there was a BIG TWIST in it at the end that made me go like: 'Holy cow HE was the detective?!?'
- As I went through the short stories. Some stories became a bit predictable...or maybe I progressed in deducing from sentences haha
adventurous
challenging
inspiring
lighthearted
mysterious
relaxing
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated