A Study in Scarlet

The first Sherlock Holmes book, and the start of one of the most iconic characters of all time. Unlike movies and TV shows, a flashback to Utah plays an important role in the book. Although it came as a surprise, I did enjoy the payoff in the book moreso than in the video form. There was much more background to the murders that gave the villain more of a heart – and a real motive.

The book follows the same dry formula from The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes. Case presented, Holmes investigates it and based on small details he solves what seems to be impossible.

Three things contributes to make this book larger then a short story:
- the case is a more slowly presented, although this doesn't add too much to the story. It is still satisfying to hear Holmes logical deductions.
- there is a small presentation of how Watson and Holmes meet, and also a minor introduction to the police inspectors
- there is a story inside the main story. When the culprit of the murder is found, he tells his tale and it takes a whole chunk of the book. It was a nice sub-story, but nothing special about it.

The second half of the novel is some of the most compelling literature I've ever read. Well worth the read for that alone.

Challenge: Read a book based on or turned into a TV show

I was looking forward to reading this since it was the very first Sherlock Holmes story. I'm thinking of re-reading The Hound..., which I didn't like much, because I enjoyed quite a lot both The Adventures... and this book.

Moffat ends his introduction with “We love sweet reason and good friendships” and I have to say it's a great way to summarize how I feel about Sherlock Holmes stories. I'm drawn to Sherlock/Watson dynamics and loved to see how they were so different but worked so well together.

Even though I've read (and also saw it in the different adaptations) that Sherlock is so cruel and rude, he didn't come across like that IN THIS NOVEL to me at all. He was very sarcastic and full of himself but to me, he wasn't being a douche to anyone.

I have to say that I was very surprised by the second part of the novel. Although I was quite confused at first, I thought it was a completely new way to tell the culprit's story and I like it.

Overall an enjoyable read, with the first half and the last third being exceptional but I found the backstory of the murderer to be very slow and this detracted from my overall rating.

Full review can be found at the SFF Book Review


Dr. John Watson has just returned from his work as a war surgeon in Afghanistan and is looking for somebody to share a flat with him. He is introduced to Sherlock Holmes, the only existing consulting detective in the world – and his theory of deduction. Soon Watson learns that it is more than a theroy as he watches Holmes figure out the details of a murder case. A dead man is found on the floor of an empty apartment, the only (to us ordinary people) clue is the German word RACHE written on the wall in blood.

I was surprised at how readable this book was. Maybe I underestimate my own ability to read English but then I did read my first Sherlock Holmes when I was about 19 years old. Either way, the language has a nice flow to it and I finished this small adventure in about two hours. The unravelling of the case was done quickly, even for Holmes' standards, but the second half of the book shows us the murderer's backstory. We turn from dialogue-heavy banter between Holmes and the police force to a tale that makes us look at the murderer in a different way and shows us his true motive.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle managed to pack a fair bit of criticism into his detective story and that also took me by surprise. I will definitely read all the other Sherlock Holmes stories (even though I'm worried I might deduct the outcome from my having seen the TV show) and I'll probably reread The Hound of Baskervilles as well. Holmes is a likable, if very cocky, hero (don't tell him I called him that) and while his knowledge in certain fields is almost unbelievable, I will gladly suspend my desbelief for the sake of a good story.

I recommend these books for anyone who – like me, a number of years ago – is daunted by the idea of “reading the classics”. This quick read doesn't only show the beginnings of Holmes and Watson's beautiful friendship but it offers a fun detective story and a surprisingly intriguing background to our murderer.

THE GOOD: Easy to read, great characters, a lot of depth that I was surprised to find on so few pages.
THE BAD: The actual detecting could have lasted longer for my taste. I can't get enough of Sherlock's wise-cracking.
THE VERDICT: Recommended, but maybe a longer Sherlock tale would be a better starter-drug.

RATING: 6,5/10

Hard to believe but I‰ЫЄve never actually read Sherlock Holmes before. I know! Much easier and more fun than I was expecting. Holmes is pretty likable in this, but we‰ЫЄll see – The Sign of Four is up next and we may get to know him better. Reading the actual books makes me a little more interested in watching the TV series; we watched the first season and ‰ЫПThe Blind Banker‰Ыќ really turned me off (icky but typical British xenophobia; you‰ЫЄd think they‰ЫЄd be better these days but they aren‰ЫЄt).

Covers how Holmes and watson meet. The story is pretty good. I did the BBC Audio dramatization. It was well acted.

I went through a bit of a Victorian period in my early teens, and Holmes was a major part of that. I don't think I ever read this one, though, oddly enough? A fairly quick read; the solution to the mystery comes across a little deus ex machina, and there's this weird interlude of 6 chapters or so focusing on the Mormons of Utah, and their “exotic culture” that is textbook Victorian literature. Still, an interesting introduction to Holmes and Watson, and their relationship.