Comment

May 07, 2018Andrew Kyle Bacon rated this title 3.5 out of 5 stars
It's so strange, this being the first Holmes story, as it is wholly underwhelming. I am glad, however, that it establishes one of the finest literary characters conceived, and introduced the world to the World's Greatest Detective. Yet the book is strange, featuring a very odd structure in its second half, which mars the book, although not perhaps as much as other reviewers would lead you to believe. The first half of the novel, where Holmes undertakes the investigation proper, is enthralling and engaging, but the second half of the novel, which follows three characters who become entwined with Brigham Young (yes, that Brigham Young) and the settling of Utah. It's such a strange turn, and feels like such a swift tonal shift that it seems wrong. Suddenly, we are gone from the streets of London and have turned to the Prairie and the desert. Suddenly our detective novel turns to a western novel, and the change is so peculiar that it might leave you scratching your head. That is, until you see exactly what Doyle is doing. He shifts the narrative from Dr. Watson's account of the case, a subjective telling from his perspective of how Holmes works, to an "objective," historical narrative accounting for the events leading up to the crime. It also reveals how strong of a writer Doyle was, since in his attempt to switch settings he switches genres as well, molding his style to fit the landscape in which he writes. Is A Study in Scarlet the best of the Holmes' stories which I've read? Not by any chance! But is it a bad novella on its own? By no means. In fact, it's so short and engaging, I wonder why anyone would begrudge it and not wish to read it to completion. It's not bad by any means, it just doesn't quite fit with what we expect a Holmes story to be like. But, to be very fair, The Hound of the Baskervilles is also a very strange novel. Perhaps our perception of what a Holmes story is like is shaped more by movies and TV than we think? Perhaps these stories seem odd to readers because they view Holmes through the lens of how he has been presented, not by his creator, but by his interpreters. Perhaps, just perhaps, the reason we react to these stories and find them so odd, is because we don't exactly know who Sherlock Holmes is because we've never read him. I'm finding that to be the case with me.