A Study in Scarlet

A Study in Scarlet

'There's a scarlet thread of murder running through the colourless skein of life, and our duty is to unravel it, and isolate it, and expose every inch of it.'From the moment Dr John Watson takes lodgings in Baker Street with the consulting detective Sherlock Holmes, he becomes intimately acquainted with the bloody violence and frightening ingenuity of the criminal mind.In...

DownloadRead Online
Title:A Study in Scarlet
Author:Arthur Conan Doyle
Rating:
ISBN:1420925539
Edition Language:English
Format Type:Paperback
Number of Pages:108 pages

A Study in Scarlet Reviews

  • Tatiana
    Nov 28, 2010

    's first Sherlock Holmes novel is utterly unimpressive. In short, the book starts like this:

    and mid-way turns into this:

    And I am not even joking. The novel begins with Holmes and Watson meeting, moving into their Baker Street apartment and then investigating a murder of a man found in an abandoned house. At the half point, however, the story completely changes its course and becomes the most awkward introduction of the murderer's back story and motives involving Mo

    's first Sherlock Holmes novel is utterly unimpressive. In short, the book starts like this:

    and mid-way turns into this:

    And I am not even joking. The novel begins with Holmes and Watson meeting, moving into their Baker Street apartment and then investigating a murder of a man found in an abandoned house. At the half point, however, the story completely changes its course and becomes the most awkward introduction of the murderer's back story and motives involving Mormons, polygamy, violence, money, and Brigham Young. The structure of

    is utterly bizarre.

    But let's not linger on the bad. I want to use this review to shamelessly hype the new BBC version of Sherlock Holmes.

    This is an absolutely delightful modernized take on the old characters and it offers a much better version of

    's dreadful story. So, check it out.

  • Apatt
    Aug 29, 2011

    Ah! My dear reader of review, I see you have just returned from Afghanistan, in a black cab, driven by an Italian driver, on your way here you stopped for breakfast at a McDonald's where you were served by a pregnant red-headed lady. I am sure you are wondering how I know all this. Well, my dear fellow (I have also immediately deduced your gender) I have my methods. Now, to the matter of writing this

    review, that, my friend, is a three pipes problem.

    Wait! Don't go away just ye

    Ah! My dear reader of review, I see you have just returned from Afghanistan, in a black cab, driven by an Italian driver, on your way here you stopped for breakfast at a McDonald's where you were served by a pregnant red-headed lady. I am sure you are wondering how I know all this. Well, my dear fellow (I have also immediately deduced your gender) I have my methods. Now, to the matter of writing this

    review, that, my friend, is a three pipes problem.

    Wait! Don't go away just yet! I've finished with that crap now, I am aware that reviewing is a serious undertaking which should not be subjected to this kind of tomfoolery and silly references. Not to worry. The game is afoot! (sorry).

    is Conan Doyle’s very first Sherlock Holmes story, and as such appears to be the most read, according to Goodreads’

    page. So the first section of the novel introduces our beloved narrator, Dr. John Watson; just back from Afghanistan, looking for an affordable accommodation. Some bloke introduced him to Sherlock and Bob’s your uncle. Of course, we are treated to the very first depiction of Holmes’ amazing power of observation.

    (Gratuitous Sherlock photo)

    Then they get settled into 221B Baker Street, Holmes starts shredding on his violin, and the British bobbies coming to consult him about the strange case of the gentleman what died of unknown causes, which they find to be “too many” for them. Homes does a lot of his patented scrutinizing, crawling, sniffing, tasting thing, to the astonishment of everybody, but none more so than Watson who is an instant fanboy. Not long after, just when Holmes is about to collar the guilty party, the book goes to Part 2 and something happened which would have flummoxed even Holmes himself if he wasn't confined inside the narrative.

    Basically, in

    Holmes and Watson completely disappeared from the book, and the narrative shifts to the backstory of the murderer who is kind of a good bloke, multiple homicides notwithstanding. When I first read

    many years ago I very much enjoyed the introduction of Holmes and Watson, when I reached Part 2 I was jarred by their sudden absence from the narrative, I flipped through the book and found that Part 2, sans Holmes & Watson goes on for more than 50 pages! I almost gave up on the book then, but gritted my teeth and finished it anyway. Of course, H&W do come back for the excellent denouement. I remember being bored by this Part 2 though, it made me feel like a Holmesless man!

    Rereading the book now I have to say that Part 2 is actually a very good standalone-ish story; full of dark villainy, bloody vengeance, and evil Mormons (what?).

    Anyway, it is lots of fun if you can forgive the lack of Sherlock, it does help a lot, knowing that in advance. So, fair warning, you read this book and you do without Sherlock for quite a while. In any case, Conan Doyle was a first class storyteller, and this Part 2 is not at all dull. If you want a novel without a meaty non-Sherlock sandwich filling, you may want to pick up

    , but really just read

    and enjoy it as it is. it's elementary.

    ___________________

    , read extremely well by David Clarke. Thank you!

    • The very first Sherlock episode "A Study in Pink" takes a surprising amount of plot elements from this book. I shouldn't be surprised really, but I insist.

    ["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>

  • K.D. Absolutely
    Dec 28, 2011

    This is the book that completes my 2011 Goodreads Reading Challenge!

    books and I still have 3 days to spare. My first target was

    because that was the the annual target of the author Nicholas Sparks as he said in one of his interviews. But I achieved it in September so I changed it to

    But I achieved 250 on the last week of October and I thought I could still read 25 more. So, here I am, proud that I was able to read 275 books!!! Last year, I only read 196 b

    This is the book that completes my 2011 Goodreads Reading Challenge!

    books and I still have 3 days to spare. My first target was

    because that was the the annual target of the author Nicholas Sparks as he said in one of his interviews. But I achieved it in September so I changed it to

    But I achieved 250 on the last week of October and I thought I could still read 25 more. So, here I am, proud that I was able to read 275 books!!! Last year, I only read 196 books and I did not top Nicholas Sparks. Now, I am able to and I still keep my 8-5 office job.

    So,

    It is very rewarding. Reading brought me to a lot of unfamiliar places, time and situations. Reading is very enriching (at least in mind, not yet in terms of financial rewards). I no longer worry about so many menial and mundane things that I used to worry about. When I am worry now, I think of the books about holocaust or 9/11, since I read a lot of books about these two, and say that my worry (of something that did not actually happen) is nothing compared to what Elie Wiesel or Victor Frankl experienced in the concentration camps. Also, when presented with a situation, be it in the office or at home, I now have a bigger perspective and no longer focus on my personal bias and prejudices. I used to have a lot of those before I became a voracious reader.

    that I developed this year: (1) I read in every opportunity. I bring at least two books everywhere I go. I read before going to sleep. I read before getting out of bed. I read almost the whole Saturdays and Sundays. We have maids in the Philippines. I read while waiting for the car ban (we call this color coding) at the gym. I read while on queue at the ATM machine. I read the bible or any related religious book while waiting for the priest to show up during the Holy Mass; and (2) I read 5-12 books simultaneously. The idea is that if the book becomes boring or the story becomes dragging, switch to an enjoyable one. Normally, the start of the book is very engaging and the end is very interesting but the middle could be a bore. If this happens, start a new one. If it is good, then I'll be able to finish it in few days and then I go back to the previous book. Because my energy is high, the boring part will be manageable (translations: forgivable or unnoticeable) and I'll be able to continue.

    No and yes. I think I did not understand everything but I tried reading each and every word in all of the 275 books. They say that there are indeed books that are intended to be taken as puzzle. Think of

    by James Joyce. He put so many puzzles or riddles in the story that he expected to be interpreted in many different ways by generations to come. I think this is the beauty of reading and one reason why I enjoy works of great literary masters: their works can be interpreted in many ways and each of their works give different meanings to me every time I read them.

    I will read more classics. I have to finish Sir Conan Doyle's canon. To finally finish and try to get the gist of the whole of

    my "waterloo" book. I am still to read Mark Twain. My long delayed appreciation of Henry James' works. I have to re-discover Charles Dickens. I will read another Virginia Woolf. Another Jane Austen. Another Salman Rushdie. I need to complete the works of Haruki Murakami since I have the copies already. I will also need to increase my quota for Filipino works particularly novels written in Tagalog. I should be able to support Filipino authors by buying and reading their works.

    1.

    by Leo Tolstoy; 2.

    by Honore de Balzac; 3.

    by Sandor Marai; 4.

    by Kiran Desai; 5.

    by Emilie Bronte; 6.

    by F. Sionil Jose; 7.

    by Ken Kesey; 8.

    by Flann O'Brien; 9.

    by Timothy Findley and 10.

    by Alvin B. Yapan. These are the books that I'd like to recommend to you if you have not read them. Except #10, they are all in English.

    This is my first novel about Sherlock Holmes. I only read two books from this genre before and both of them by female writers: Agatha Christie's

    and Sarah Cauldwell's

    These two are good and well written but I just find all those whodunnit quite uninteresting. Mystery crime books are focused on what happened (where, who, why and when actually not just what) and authors make them so convoluted for the readers to not be able to predict who is the real murderer. This being the nature of the genre, it normally lacks the human emotion that make me enjoy reading.

    And so I thought that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is the same as the two ladies. A big mistake.

    his first novel and where Sherlock Holmes was introduced to the world, has that emotional drama particularly on revenge because of lost love. The structure of the novel is very interesting: two seemingly independent "stories" fused into two. The first one is about Holmes meeting his narrator,

    and they started sharing a room because they cannot afford the rent. There is a crime that two detectives cannot solve and they want to have the opinion Holmes. Before the end of the first story, Holmes is able to tell who the real killer is. When he said "Gentlemen, let me introduce to you Mr. Jefferson Hope..." my mouth was open, my jaw dropped and I could not speak as I was taken by full surprise.

    Then suddenly comes the "second" story whose narrative style, characters and setting are totally different that the first. It was quite jarring and I asked myself,

    Only after 10-15 pages when some names became familiar and I was able to predict the connection. However, I like this "second" story better. The setting is in the heartland USA and it felt like an old western story (a totally unexplored genre for me). It has that emotional drama of forbidden love and the father supporting his daughter to follow her heart. Mushy yet yummy for me. Men, real men, writing about love are really interesting for me. They don't go overboard and play or trick your emotion yet they

    in it.

    I liked this book. My first foray to Sherlock Holmes.

    is a 501 Must Read Book and it also became a Book of the Month for our Filipinos group here in Goodreads. I thought why only read that collection of Sherlock Holmes short stories if I could read the whole canon? With me liking his first novel

    I think I now have the right motivation to read his other 3 novels and all his 46 short stories. Had this been a disappointment (2 stars or less), I think I would not bother reading all his other works.

  • Stephen
    Jan 20, 2012

    The

    of a

    ....

    This is it...the

    in which

    ushered the world’s

    detective

    into our collective

    . Being the non-conformist

    that I am, I started off bassackwards by reading

    and then

    because those were the two stories with Moriarty in them. Shocking, I know, but that’s just how I roll. Btw, it still really chaffs my cheeks that Doyle wrote 56 short stories and 4 nove

    The

    of a

    ....

    This is it...the

    in which

    ushered the world’s

    detective

    into our collective

    . Being the non-conformist

    that I am, I started off bassackwards by reading

    and then

    because those were the two stories with Moriarty in them. Shocking, I know, but that’s just how I roll. Btw, it still really chaffs my cheeks that Doyle wrote 56 short stories and 4 novels about Holmes and the

    appears in exactly

    . I know less is sometimes more but, come on Doyle, that is on the scrimpy side of weak.

    Anyway, I have now circled back and returned to the genesis of the Sherlockian mythos and begun with the tale that started it all. Now, for those that have never read any of the Holmes mysteries, I have come to believe that your level of enjoyment of these stories will be directly proportional to your feelings toward Sherlock Holmes himself. Sir Arthur’s a fine writer and his prose is concise and polished with enough flair to make reading him very enjoyable. In addition, his plotting and pacing are excellent and I think mystery fans will appreciate both the content and structure of the central investigation and the procedural components of clue-gathering and interpretation.

    These things all point towards a pleasurable experience, However, in the end, the most important barometer in gauging your level of happy will be your reaction to Holmes himself. Thus, I thought I would focus most of my review’s attention on his character bio after briefly summing up the plot as follows:

    Holmes and Watson meet....murder is committed...Holmes investigates....clues are found...Holmes figures it out....a murderer is caught...long flashback to America where Doyle does a Krakauer-style expose on Mormons describing and their child-stealing, polygamous ways...jump forward to present.... all is made clear..... Watson slobbers all over Holmes.......

    Now, let’s take a look at Sherlock’s profile. Whether you are a hater or a homey when it comes to Holmes, I think most people would agree with the following attributes:

    The man is unlikeable...very unlikeable...extremely unlikeable.

    He is self-absorbed to the point of being sociopathic.

    His has zero empathy for the victims of the crimes he investigates.

    He is so egotistical that it actually makes his general unlikeability pale in comparison

    While never explicitly diagnosed, he is a severe manic-depressive

    He is inconsiderate, callous, cold and socially inept.

    From a personality standpoint, one of my buddies here on GR said it best...Holmes is “a dick.”

    Despite that, I find myself very much in the “homey” camp and think he’s among the more fascinating creations in the annals of literature. Part of that appeal is precisely because he is such a prickish turd in the social skill department. However it his mental faculties, the trait he is best known for, that makes him so intriguing.

    Yes, he is

    . However, that is not the end of the story

    because it is a unique and very specialized kind of brilliance. Holmes knows the details, and I mean details, of every major crime to have been perpetrated in Europe (and possibly beyond) over the last 500 years. He can also distinguish between every variety of dirt or soil in London and and can tell you the precise brand of tobacco/pipe/cigar simply by its ash.

    However, as is divulged in this story, Holmes also has no idea that the Earth travels around the sun.

    How can a man of such singular ability be so woefully lacking in common knowledge. Holmes explains to Watson thusly:

    This just struck me as particularly awesome from a story perspective. Not only does such a philosophy provide a cloak of believability to Sherlock’s preternatural detecting skills, but his glaring knowledge deficiencies make him that much more fascinating as a character.

    I guess I just find Doyle’s profile of Holmes to be superb. He is like a “not quite human” storm of deduction. He’s dispassionate, callous and unimaginably effective. Additionally, he solves crimes not because of a perceived duty, but merely because it is the only thing that keeps the boredom of life away. That and the giant stroking his ego gets when he does “the big explain” which is always entertaining and makes each story worth reading all by itself.

    Finally, I also see Holmes as a tragic figure. He is a sad, lonely and devoid of any lasting sense of contentment or pleasure. While alive and invigorated when the game is afoot, most of his time is spent as a mere husk of a man with no feeling of day-to-day happiness.

    All of this makes Holmes an extraordinarily compelling figure to me and one I hope to spend a lot more time reading about. While I did not enjoy this as much as

    (my favorite so far), I was still glued to the page watching Holmes maneuver through his scenes and really enjoyed the flashback portion set in America.

    I look forward to many more of his adventures.

    4.0 stars. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!

  • Nilesh Kashyap
    Apr 16, 2012

    I don’t read reviews of books, of which I am damn sure I will be reading it very soon. Now, I don’t know how this habit affects my reading.

    So, what happened was..

    I was not aware of the fact that “I had to be surprised when the second part of the book starts and wonder what happened to the story with Sherlock Holmes in it and how that mystery was solved! Moreover, I had to wonder whether the second part was from some other book, somehow got binded in my copy and curse the publis

    I don’t read reviews of books, of which I am damn sure I will be reading it very soon. Now, I don’t know how this habit affects my reading.

    So, what happened was..

    I was not aware of the fact that “I had to be surprised when the second part of the book starts and wonder what happened to the story with Sherlock Holmes in it and how that mystery was solved! Moreover, I had to wonder whether the second part was from some other book, somehow got binded in my copy and curse the publishers”. I was not surprised and neither did I curse the publishers.

    As I was ill-prepared for reading, this resulted in me being not disappointed like I was supposed to be.

    I was not aware of the fact that “I had to loathe the second part because it didn’t have Sherlock Holmes but instead Mormons and whatnots”. I couldn't loathe it because it was equally good.

    I was even not aware of the fact that “I had to drop my jaw when Sherlock Holmes says

    ”. But I did, so atleast I got some expression right.

    You see, I was not aware of such shortcomings and issues so I enjoyed it a bit more than I should have. It’s a promise that I will hate the second part and enjoy it less on my re-read.

    Okay, what the hell am I going to write for this review without writing spoilers, because everything turns out to be a spoiler.

    Damn! This is hard.

    I don’t know what to include and what not to include!

    Maybe, I should include this line, for this is best:

    No, I should not, since almost every reviewer has used this line. So I am not going to write it in my review too and lengthen it unnecessarily, I will skip this.

    This is going to be damn hard, I can't find a single thing to write about.

    And what should I write about Sherlock Holmes?

    Kemper wrote: “

    ” and got bunch of votes. I should also write something like that.

    Like,

    . Nah! that doesn’t sound nice and that is not correct either.

    I don’t want to write about the same issue of disjointed second part being a problem and this part being boring too, I didn’t felt so. But almost every review says same thing.

    I can’t think of anything to write. I should probably skip this one and write review of

    , I need to edit that ‘FUCKING MINDFUCK’ I have left over there.

    No, I must write something!

    Maybe, I should review others' reviews and in this process the book will also be reviewed. This sounds like good idea, but may be offensive. So I should mention in my review at last that:

  • Delee
    Feb 20, 2013

    A STUDY IN SCARLET!!! First group-read for the intact official Non-Crunchy-Sans Pants- for no reason that I can figure out...but none-the-less...NON pants wearing GRs classic reading group.

    I read A STUDY IN SCARLET waaaaaaaay back in my younger days- and remembered very little of it. To be perfectly honest- I remembered the title...and reading it- but nothing else. Whether it is my memory...or the fact that it wasn't memorable can be argued- but I liked it. A LOT.

    Setti

    A STUDY IN SCARLET!!! First group-read for the intact official Non-Crunchy-Sans Pants- for no reason that I can figure out...but none-the-less...NON pants wearing GRs classic reading group.

    I read A STUDY IN SCARLET waaaaaaaay back in my younger days- and remembered very little of it. To be perfectly honest- I remembered the title...and reading it- but nothing else. Whether it is my memory...or the fact that it wasn't memorable can be argued- but I liked it. A LOT.

    Setting:

    221B Baker Street, London- 1881

    A mutual acquaintance introduces: John Watson -physician, and Sherlock Holmes- detective consultant, to each other- both men in need of a room-mate. Thus starting a friendship and working relationship that will most definitely be a formidable pairing.

    At first Sherlock's personality is somewhat off-putting (not unlike Dan 2.0's)...but as Watson settles in- he gets used to the detective's unusual ways.

    Plot:

    Scotland Yard detective Gregson asks Holmes to assist him in solving a recently committed crime...and in turn- Holmes asks Watson to accompany him. They travel to an empty house in a London- and there they observe a crime scene that includes: cab prints in the street...footprints in the yard...a dead man who has been poisoned, and the word RACHE- in blood on the wall.

    The game is afoot!!! Need I say more?

  • Anne
    Aug 25, 2015

    Ok, the big deal about this one is that you get to see the Sherlock/Watson meet-cute. I mean, this is one of the most important meetings in the history of all literature! Come on, people! Get excited!

    It's only fair to mention that I've read and reread all of these stories a bjillion times, and these are by far my favorite

    characters.

    But I know I haven't read P&P as

    Ok, the big deal about this one is that you get to see the Sherlock/Watson meet-cute. I mean, this is one of the most important meetings in the history of all literature! Come on, people! Get excited!

    It's only fair to mention that I've read and reread all of these stories a bjillion times, and these are by far my favorite

    characters.

    But I know I haven't read P&P as many times as I have Sherlock's mysteries, which should tell you something right there.

    And, just to be clear, I loved him before he was all sexified.

    Ok, so Watson is back from the war (he basically just got trounced on and then came home), and

    is running low on funds. Luckily, he runs into an old pal from school, who just happens to know of this guy who's looking for a roommate. One thing leads to another, and the next thing you know, Felix & Oscar have found their forever home!

    Alright, as far as the

    goes, it's just Sherlock running around sniffing things, (implausibly) being able to identify cigar ash, and tracing the movement of criminals using day-old (tromped on) footprints.

    Given what we know about forensic evidence now, is any of this,

    , even remotely believable? Can Sherlock actually

    the answer to this mystery from horse tracks, a dead man's bad breath, and a plain wedding band?

    So...

    ?

    Now, I'm fully prepared to admit that I had forgotten about the Mormon Connection. I haven't read this one

    , mostly because I prefer the short stories.

    But, to uncover the reasons behind the killings, Doyle takes us on a journey to the wilds of America! Specifically, Utah.

    This was where the tale of one man's thirst for vengeance was born. And it's all Brigham Young's fault. He was eeeeeeevil!

    I'm assuming that Mormonism (like most religions) has its share of shady skeleton's in the closet. Now, I don't claim to be an expert on these guys. And I don't personally know very many Mormons, due to their predilection for Salt Lake City. All I know about that religion is what I've seen on tv or read in books, and it's not much.

    They wear special underwear. They can't watch R-rated movies. And they used to go door-to-door, until the Jehovah's Witness got to be too much competition.

    There's something else I'm forgetting though... What is it? It's right there on the tip of my tongue.

    No, there was something that looked like a big pink elephant...

    Yes. Well, from what I can tell, the only Mormons who practice polygamy now are fringe groups that are more or less shunned by their peers.

    And while I'm not on board with any religion, I doubt that this one is much weirder than most, at this point anyway. Plus, at least most Mormons seem to be pretty educated and well-off. It's not like Salt Lake City is one huge trailer park filled with toothless hillbillies. And (bonus!) they seem to have the sense to keep their crazy old people off the airwaves...

    Or so I thought! Now that I've read this, I'm going to have to rethink my plan to move west! Who knew these guys were so devious!?

    Was this really a five star book?

    Fuck, no. But it's my favorite character's first book, and I enjoyed the hell out of it.

  • Carmen
    Aug 31, 2015

    This is the first Sherlock Holmes story, a novel which introduces the now legendary detecting team of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson.

    Watson is looking for a roommate and is introduced to Holmes with some

    This is the first Sherlock Holmes story, a novel which introduces the now legendary detecting team of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson.

    Watson is looking for a roommate and is introduced to Holmes with some warnings.

    But Watson and Holmes get along, and end up being one of the strongest pairings in all of literature.

    ...

    This isn't my first, second, or even third time reading this book. Parts of it are etched on my brain, never to be erased.

    Now, I don't agree with Sherlock on this. But the passage stays with me, and is often discussed amongst my friends and family. This is probably the most memorable passage in the book (for me, at least).

    ...

    Holmes is rather self-sufficient and self-contained, but in no way is he a cold, callous, rude or even distant man. I dislike when he's portrayed as emotionless or cruel, because even in this first story he's obviously not an anti-social creature.

    When he meets Watson he is a bit anxious that his violin playing will disturb him. Later, to make up for all his meandering here and there on the violin, without shape or form - he plays beautiful and famous pieces for Watson in order to please him.

    And he thrives on Watson's wide-eyed awe of him and his innate trust in Sherlock's abilities.

    This adoration of Watson somewhat makes up for Holmes the bitterness and rancor he feels on not getting the credit he is due for solving the police's more difficult cases.

    ...

    The book is really divided up into two parts, and the first part is the more enjoyable part.

    In the first part, Watson and Holmes meet, slowly get acquainted and suss each other out. Then eventually Holmes's profession is revealed, and the fun starts when a man is found murdered in an empty house. The police are stumped and come to Holmes for help. And Holmes wants Watson along for the ride.

    The second part is more uncomfortable due to the extreme battering of Mormons and Mormon religion. Mormons are portrayed as evil rapists and slavers. If you are upset by this portrayal, this book might be very painful for you to read.

    Not to say that the first part is free and clear. For instance, when Watson sees the body of the murdered man, he remarks:

    This kind of idea - the person is ugly; Ugliness is a manifestation of evil in a person just as beauty is a manifestation of good. Judging a person - a person who was murdered, terrified and alone! - by their ugly facial features as "deserving of murder," makes me upset. However, this was a common literary trope back then and (unfortunately) still is today. Ugliness, disability, and deformities are often shown as "signs" and "proof" of a person's deviance and malevolence.

    ...

    This book focuses on a revenge plot, and there are some great quotes about vengeance in here.

    And

    ...

    Tl;dr - A classic, and for a good reason. Who wouldn't enjoy seeing the world's most famous detective solve his first case with Dr. Watson by his side? And unlike many classics, this is easy to read and fast paced. Besides a few slang terms no longer in effect, and one or two times I was reaching for my dictionary, this reading presented no problems at all. Doyle possesses a straightforward and exciting writing style - he doesn't spend hours describing the scenery or make his characters talk in an affected way. The story is gripping and will have you turning pages quickly. As Watson would say,

    You will also find sleep elusive as you chase murderers alongside the fierce Sherlock and the intrepid Watson! Happy trails!

    *It's spelled like this in my copy.

    Available in Spanish as Estudio en Escarlata.

  • Jeff
    Sep 01, 2015

    This is an underwhelming debut for one of literature’s most famous characters.

    Doyle’s Sherlock is in the nascent stage here and isn’t the fully fleshed out character, readers came to know. The steady and reliable narrator, Dr. John Watson gets introduced to Holmes in Watson’s attempts to find a roommate.

    “Can two odd Victorian Era men share a flat without driving each other crazy?”

    Sure, why not.

    Watson takes measure of Holmes:

    Although the illustration below belies it, the producers of the TV sho

    This is an underwhelming debut for one of literature’s most famous characters.

    Doyle’s Sherlock is in the nascent stage here and isn’t the fully fleshed out character, readers came to know. The steady and reliable narrator, Dr. John Watson gets introduced to Holmes in Watson’s attempts to find a roommate.

    “Can two odd Victorian Era men share a flat without driving each other crazy?”

    Sure, why not.

    Watson takes measure of Holmes:

    Although the illustration below belies it, the producers of the TV show pretty much took the first time Holmes and Watson encounter a dead body and lovingly re-produced it almost to the letter.

    I think what most readers get put off by is the huge “evil” Morman digression that pops up around midway in this novella. It’s a jarring, uncomfortable fit. It gives credence to belief that Doyle’s Holmes should be read as short stories and not as longer narratives. For a little over a hundred pages, this took a lot longer to plow through than I would have initially thought

    .

    Recommended for those who have an interest in knowing where the legend began and for Sherlock completists.

    This was a buddy read with a bunch of non-crunchy folks who like to read whilst pants free.

  • Mohammed Arabey
    Jan 15, 2017

    -

    -

    -فشخصية دكتور هاوس مثلا صاحب المسلسل التليفزيوني الشهير يعتبر مقتبسا بشكل غير مباشر من شيرلوك، والمسلسل نفسه مليء بالتلميحات لروايات دويل-

    كما أنها من المرات النادرة التي يلتزم فيها ديزني بالواقعية في الحجم ، فباسيل "شيرلوك" هو فأر بالحجم الطبيعي وليس كباقي شخصيات ميكي احجامها غير واقعية

    مع ان -كما ذكرت بمراجعة رواية "ثم لم يبق أحد"،-ان والدتي كانت تدفعني لقراءتها قديما بجانب مجلة ميكي روايات اجاثا كريستي وارسين لوبين

    لكني لم اجد ترجمات وقتها لشيرلوك رغم حماسي لفكرة المخبر السري بسبب كوميكس لغز ميكي الشهير

    حسنا، هي مناسبة سعيدة اذن، وتركتني برغبة في قراءة المزيد عن شيرلوك والغازه والتي بالتأكيد سأبدأ بها هذا العام أن شاء الله

    مع الرواية الثانية قريبا، ومجموعة قصصية تلحقها لنقرأ الاعمال بالترتيب

    محمد العربي

    من 15 يناير 2017

    الي 17 يناير 2017