Books: Sherlock Holmes and The Golden Bird, The Sacred Sword, and the Treasure Train
Once I got done with soothing reading, I wanted something fun!
I've had these Sherlock Holmes novels approximately forever, and decided to go ahead and read them. They're ... not very good, but a lot of fun, I guess is how I'd put it.
The biggest problems I have with the books are (a) their characterizations of non-Europeans and (b) their characterization of Watson. I also had problems with factual errors, although I tried to just read past them and chiefly succeeded.
We get the "heathen Chinee" stereotype again that I complained about in the Moriarty books, especially in Sherlock Holmes and the Golden Bird, and in Sherlock Holmes and the Sacred Sword we get some demeaning stereotypes of Arab characters. Maybe the author thought that this is how Doyle would have written about them, but Doyle had diverse characters whom he fleshed out as individuals as well as some pretty bad stereotypes--why not imitate the former rather than the latter? These stereotypes sullied the books, making them harder to enjoy in a general kind of way.
The characterization of Watson made it harder to enjoy the books as Holmesian works. Basically, Watson was all over the map. He repeatedly portrays himself as clumsy, overweight, and claims to be rather dim, almost as if he is channeling the Nigel Bruce portrayal. At the same time, he uses his medical skills quite intelligently (and says so) and in each book he generally does something pretty cool that wins Holmes's admiration, though often by accident. (The best one is in the Sacred Sword book, where Watson really does something brave and clever and admirable.) And the author mostly maintains a pretty good Victorian flavor and while I wouldn't say he's got Watson's voice perfectly, there are some really graceful passages here and there that remind me of Doyle at his most elegant. (And of course, others that sound overly flowery, but I like the fact that the author is really trying.) There's no hurt/comfort, but poor Watson seems to get kidnapped pretty often and Holmes is generally in a rage about it.
The author introduces a number of secondary characters who continue from one novel to the next. One of Mycroft's operatives who periodically helps Holmes out could be in danger of being a male Mary Sue, but I didn't mind him too much. There aren't a whole lot of female characters, period.
The books are imaginative and exciting and the author has a way of pulling the reader into the story and making one want to know what happens next. They're a fun fast read--if you slow down and look too closely at the details, there are a lot of factual errors, especially noticeable when he's dealing with antiquities. Sherlock Holmes and the Treasure Train seemed a bit duller than the others, as there was a lot of exposition about 19th century banking practices that dragged down the narrative (plus I couldn't trust whether it was accurate, given that other books were inaccurate on topics that I knew about).
This entry was originally posted at https://amedia.dreamwidth.org/396311.html.
I've had these Sherlock Holmes novels approximately forever, and decided to go ahead and read them. They're ... not very good, but a lot of fun, I guess is how I'd put it.
The biggest problems I have with the books are (a) their characterizations of non-Europeans and (b) their characterization of Watson. I also had problems with factual errors, although I tried to just read past them and chiefly succeeded.
We get the "heathen Chinee" stereotype again that I complained about in the Moriarty books, especially in Sherlock Holmes and the Golden Bird, and in Sherlock Holmes and the Sacred Sword we get some demeaning stereotypes of Arab characters. Maybe the author thought that this is how Doyle would have written about them, but Doyle had diverse characters whom he fleshed out as individuals as well as some pretty bad stereotypes--why not imitate the former rather than the latter? These stereotypes sullied the books, making them harder to enjoy in a general kind of way.
The characterization of Watson made it harder to enjoy the books as Holmesian works. Basically, Watson was all over the map. He repeatedly portrays himself as clumsy, overweight, and claims to be rather dim, almost as if he is channeling the Nigel Bruce portrayal. At the same time, he uses his medical skills quite intelligently (and says so) and in each book he generally does something pretty cool that wins Holmes's admiration, though often by accident. (The best one is in the Sacred Sword book, where Watson really does something brave and clever and admirable.) And the author mostly maintains a pretty good Victorian flavor and while I wouldn't say he's got Watson's voice perfectly, there are some really graceful passages here and there that remind me of Doyle at his most elegant. (And of course, others that sound overly flowery, but I like the fact that the author is really trying.) There's no hurt/comfort, but poor Watson seems to get kidnapped pretty often and Holmes is generally in a rage about it.
The author introduces a number of secondary characters who continue from one novel to the next. One of Mycroft's operatives who periodically helps Holmes out could be in danger of being a male Mary Sue, but I didn't mind him too much. There aren't a whole lot of female characters, period.
The books are imaginative and exciting and the author has a way of pulling the reader into the story and making one want to know what happens next. They're a fun fast read--if you slow down and look too closely at the details, there are a lot of factual errors, especially noticeable when he's dealing with antiquities. Sherlock Holmes and the Treasure Train seemed a bit duller than the others, as there was a lot of exposition about 19th century banking practices that dragged down the narrative (plus I couldn't trust whether it was accurate, given that other books were inaccurate on topics that I knew about).
This entry was originally posted at https://amedia.dreamwidth.org/396311.html.