A Study in Scarlet by Arthur Conan DoyleMy rating: 4 of 5 stars
Month Read In: February 2022
Challenge:
This was a re-read for me. I do not recall when, that was before I was keeping track of such things. Also, I wanted a refresh since I just joined Audible and 62 hours of Stephen Fry reading Sherlock Holmes is included in my membership. With how the file is set up, it made no sense spending an hour trying to find where The Sign of Four began.
Additionally, it gives me the opportunity to more critically rate it using the CAWPILE system.
I'm giving Characters a 9. It's Sherlock and Watson, for crying out loud. The way Conan Doyle describes Sherlock and as Watson narrates from the first person, the details are phenomenal. He is literally one of the most well developed characters ever written. Sherlock and Watson are written as though they are real people that walked the streets of Victorian London. In this book, Part II does start off very confusingly. There is not much in the way of segue from Part I to Part II and it is jarring and takes a very long time in the story of Lucy Ferrier and her adoptive father to determine how this story connects to Sherlock back in London.
The Atmosphere of the book is a little less impressive. This story spends more time immersing us in Holmes and Watson's personalities and the beginning of their relationship, and of course the investigation of the crime than it does in making Victorian London come alive. Rated at a 7.
The Writing gets a 8.75 from me though. The way Conan Doyle has always had such mastery over the English language in vocabulary and grammar is astounding.
Plot and Intrigue got 8's for this tale. The plot is sadly part intrigues and park Sherlock holding back pertinent information so that he can crow about how much smarter he is than anyone else he comes into contact with. He really needn't do this as we all know he is, but this is one of his most endearing and humanizing flaws that make him seem so life-like. What intrigues me the most is the inclusion of the Mormons as plot device, how it brought the crime to London and why Conan Doyle would have included it.
Logic gets a 10. I mean please. Sherlockian logic. I should not need to say anything more upon the subject. But I will. That is to say that the inclusion of Sherlock's methodology for arriving at information within split seconds without any thought to the thought processes that brings him to unerringly accurate knowledge points distinctly reminds me of how I explain my own ADHD thought processes to the curious. I make snap statements in mere moments that people are shocked to find scarily accurate. It takes longer to explain how I came to know the obvious facts than to come to know them. It unnerves people, so I can see how Watson and Lestrade and Gregson felt in Sherlock's presence. I just hope I don't come off as an arrogant snot when I do it.
My enjoyment of A Study in Scarlet was only marred by the aforementioned jarring shift between Parts I and II. I said I had read (listened) to the book before, and I'd still forgotten about this odd shift that comes almost out of nowhere. I love the end result of this choice, but in the moment, it truly made me mad.
All in all the score for our introduction to the world of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson of 221B Baker Street came out to 8.21, which in CAWPILE v3.0 is a 4.5 stars. I round my half stars down for the sake of Goodreads, making this a very, very high 4 stars.
View all my reviews
No comments:
Post a Comment