A couple days ago, I received four of Alistair Duncan's books, published through MX. I'm working my way through the first one, called Eliminate the Impossible. (Amazon is being a pain today, so there won't be any links in this entry.) Anyway, I hadn't known that these books were non-fiction. Honestly, I don't have much of an interest in non-fiction, most likely because of the differences in the set up between fiction and non-fiction. However, he was kind enough to read and review my first book and said that he would read and review my second, so the least I can do in return is read/review his.
While I'm not done with Eliminate the Impossible, I'm a good chunk through it. It basically gives us a synopsis of the 56 short stories and 4 novels that Arthur Conan Doyle gave us, and then a probable year the story takes place, and some of the inconsistencies shown in the writing. For instance, A Scandal in Bohemia, the short story where we meet Irene Adler. The story itself says that it happens in late March, 1888. Pretty clear cut, right? However, Duncan's book pins the story in 1889, because another story makes a reference to this one, or perhaps this one makes a reference to another, but whichever one it is, that reference works against Watson being accurate in the time frame of March of '88. (For the sake of Jack of All Trades, I'm going with what was written in Scandal, by the way.)
The second part of Duncan's book features different actors who have portrayed Holmes on stage/film. I've skimmed this part of the book. The most familiar names I know that are attached to Holmes are Basil Rathbone, Jeremy Brett, Matthew Frewer, Nicholas Rowe, Michael Caine, Robert Downey Jr., and Benedict Cumberbatch. This book was written before the RDJ movies and before the BBC's Sherlock, however. Now, Basil Rathbone, I don't think I've actually sat down and watched his portrayal of Holmes. Jeremy Brett, I've seen a couple of episodes because I bought them recently on DVD. Nicholas Rowe played Holmes in Young Sherlock Holmes, my first movie experience of Sherlock Holmes. Michael Caine played a bumbling, clueless "Holmes" in the comedic Without a Clue, where Watson is the true genius. And Matthew Frewer played Holmes in several movies, including one I've taken to liking called The Case of the Whitechapel Vampire. Not to be confused with Dan Turnbloom's book of the same name, available from MX. The former has nothing to do with Jack the Ripper, the latter is entirely about Jack the Ripper and Holmes's investigation into the identity of said Ripper.
Unfortunately for Nicholas Rowe and Michael Caine, neither are mentioned in Duncan's book. Perhaps an oversight, perhaps the movies were too obscure, or perhaps spacing ion the book demanded things be left out. Because I will say that's a disadvantage of this book. It's very short, considering all the information it attempts to cover. Though I do admit, if he went into everything, the book would probably be about a thousand pages and cost around eighty dollars.
One thing this book has inspired within me is my own desire to go through the Canon with a fine-toothed comb and see about my own attempt at a proper timeline.
I like the information Duncan's book provides, and honestly, despite that I don't gravitate towards non-fiction, I look forward to what his other books hold.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Thursday, April 26, 2012
What Makes a Pastiche?
This issue has arisen lately among MX authors and I decided to take a page from MX author, Amy Thomas and write my own opinion about it.
Let's examine the different types of Holmes stories out there. There are ones like The Execution of Sherlock Holmes by Donald Thomas that I feel very much matches how Conan Doyle wrote our favorite detective. Then there are ones like Elementary, My Dear where the writing style . . . doesn't. And let's just leave it at that. I felt it was an interesting story, even if it does take a bit to get going . . .
Okay, let me stop here and review this book. Elementary, My Dear is a Holmes book I picked up several years ago. I think I got it at the same time, or just before I got a copy of Loren D Estleman's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Holmes, and his Holmes and Dracula book. Anyway, the premise intrigued me. Moriarty was a vampire and his undead nature was discovered by Holmes, which is why the Reichenbach Falls confrontation took place. But there was an outcome I believe Holmes didn't expect. Or perhaps had just hoped would not happen, I can't recall exactly. Anyway, the outcome: he's turned into a vampire. I don't recall how or why, but he's basically put into suspended animation after Reichenbach.
Enter Samantha Watson, a medical student who has horrific nightmares and is terrified of all things blood-related. She is the descendant of THE Dr. Watson, and inherits a letter and a mission to complete. If she completes it, she inherits something like six million dollars. The mission? To resurrect the undead Holmes. Because Moriarty didn't die, either. And he's been spreading his vampirism to many others over the decades.
There are distinctly un-Holmes like parts to this book. For one, I remember a scene in which Samantha asks him to dance and Holmes, pretty nervously and bashfully, replies that he can't; he doesn't know how. And another scene where, after the romance has developed between Holmes and Samantha, they have sex. That's just weird for a number of reasons, but the first and foremost is . . . Holmes having sex? Generations of people have seen him as the one who doesn't trust the fairer sex. He has no time to waste on love or other emotions unless they pertain to someone else while he is pursuing a case. After all, I know I heard it in some Holmes related thing, 'love is an excellent motivator.' Yes, it is a natural human act, but . . . for Holmes? It's just weird.
Yet I do love the concept of the book. When you get down to it, it asks the question should the earth be saved at the expense of humanity, or should humanity be saved at the expense of the earth?
It's by far not the best Holmes book out there, and if you go in thinking that it will be anywhere near the writing style of Conan Doyle, you WILL be disappointed. However, I think it's a worthwhile read simply because of that very philosophical question it poses.
Okay, after that brief interlude, what makes a pastiche? I can't help feeling that a pastiche is a higher caliber Holmes novel. Something well-respected, possibly with even the approval of the Conan Doyle estate, and something where the author has taken loving care to reproduce a Holmes that is an embodiment of everything that Conan Doyle wrote him as, instead of adding in their own elements.
My own novels, for instance, while they are, of course, Holmes influenced, I'm aware they are not the same caliber as say, Loren D. Estleman's books. Others may or may not agree, but when I read Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Holmes, I felt like I was truly reading something that Conan Doyle had hidden away and was found years later by someone else who endeavored to publish it.
I suppose that's what it all comes down to for me. A Holmes pastiche is one that, upon reading a first, second, or tenth time, the reader still wonders how this was never published as part of the Canon, because obviously, it belongs there. All the rest, while I don't doubt are very enjoyable, as I've read more than a few enjoyable ones, fall short of being called true pastiches. They, and my own, are simply Holmes novels, endeavoring to join the ranks of everyone before us, and many after us, who are answering a call. The call of the brilliant writing and creation that can only truly belong to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, but that we all share a piece of.
Let's examine the different types of Holmes stories out there. There are ones like The Execution of Sherlock Holmes by Donald Thomas that I feel very much matches how Conan Doyle wrote our favorite detective. Then there are ones like Elementary, My Dear where the writing style . . . doesn't. And let's just leave it at that. I felt it was an interesting story, even if it does take a bit to get going . . .
Okay, let me stop here and review this book. Elementary, My Dear is a Holmes book I picked up several years ago. I think I got it at the same time, or just before I got a copy of Loren D Estleman's Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Holmes, and his Holmes and Dracula book. Anyway, the premise intrigued me. Moriarty was a vampire and his undead nature was discovered by Holmes, which is why the Reichenbach Falls confrontation took place. But there was an outcome I believe Holmes didn't expect. Or perhaps had just hoped would not happen, I can't recall exactly. Anyway, the outcome: he's turned into a vampire. I don't recall how or why, but he's basically put into suspended animation after Reichenbach.
Enter Samantha Watson, a medical student who has horrific nightmares and is terrified of all things blood-related. She is the descendant of THE Dr. Watson, and inherits a letter and a mission to complete. If she completes it, she inherits something like six million dollars. The mission? To resurrect the undead Holmes. Because Moriarty didn't die, either. And he's been spreading his vampirism to many others over the decades.
There are distinctly un-Holmes like parts to this book. For one, I remember a scene in which Samantha asks him to dance and Holmes, pretty nervously and bashfully, replies that he can't; he doesn't know how. And another scene where, after the romance has developed between Holmes and Samantha, they have sex. That's just weird for a number of reasons, but the first and foremost is . . . Holmes having sex? Generations of people have seen him as the one who doesn't trust the fairer sex. He has no time to waste on love or other emotions unless they pertain to someone else while he is pursuing a case. After all, I know I heard it in some Holmes related thing, 'love is an excellent motivator.' Yes, it is a natural human act, but . . . for Holmes? It's just weird.
Yet I do love the concept of the book. When you get down to it, it asks the question should the earth be saved at the expense of humanity, or should humanity be saved at the expense of the earth?
It's by far not the best Holmes book out there, and if you go in thinking that it will be anywhere near the writing style of Conan Doyle, you WILL be disappointed. However, I think it's a worthwhile read simply because of that very philosophical question it poses.
Okay, after that brief interlude, what makes a pastiche? I can't help feeling that a pastiche is a higher caliber Holmes novel. Something well-respected, possibly with even the approval of the Conan Doyle estate, and something where the author has taken loving care to reproduce a Holmes that is an embodiment of everything that Conan Doyle wrote him as, instead of adding in their own elements.
My own novels, for instance, while they are, of course, Holmes influenced, I'm aware they are not the same caliber as say, Loren D. Estleman's books. Others may or may not agree, but when I read Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Holmes, I felt like I was truly reading something that Conan Doyle had hidden away and was found years later by someone else who endeavored to publish it.
I suppose that's what it all comes down to for me. A Holmes pastiche is one that, upon reading a first, second, or tenth time, the reader still wonders how this was never published as part of the Canon, because obviously, it belongs there. All the rest, while I don't doubt are very enjoyable, as I've read more than a few enjoyable ones, fall short of being called true pastiches. They, and my own, are simply Holmes novels, endeavoring to join the ranks of everyone before us, and many after us, who are answering a call. The call of the brilliant writing and creation that can only truly belong to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, but that we all share a piece of.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
Save Undershaw
I've been thinking lately about "Save Undershaw." For anyone who doesn't know, Undershaw is the house in England where Arthur Conan Doyle lived for a time in his life, and also wrote parts of, I believe it was Hound of the Baskervilles, as well as some of the other Holmes short stories. It has fallen into disrepair and a group is trying to raise money to have it refurnished so that it doesn't get turned into a hotel, I think it is, therefore changing the inside irrevocably.
I admit, I haven't looked into this issue as much as I should be, but honestly, I'd like to have more information. I wish I had the ability to go to England and see Undershaw. Or just visit England, because I'm a huge Beatles fan as well as Sherlock Holmes.
Anyway, I think that this house should be preserved as it was. Too many things are just tossed by the wayside now, in favor of 'modern wonders.' There should be more care taken with things from the past, especially when they've housed such creative minds. It's ironic that so many should remember Conan Doyle for a character he ended up hating because he felt said character overshadowed the more serious writing/other characters that he authored. Yet I think that everyone who is a fan of Sherlock Holmes can appreciate the need to preserve things of the past. For us Holmes fans/fanatics/obsessors, it's always Victorian England, circa 1880-odd.
Okay, I did want to write more, but unfortunately, I'm being interrupted by my hyper little parrot who doesn't seem to want to sit quietly on my shoulder. Instead, he wants to climb everywhere, including on my head, which wouldn't be so bad, if he didn't then lean over and try to preen my eyelashes...
I admit, I haven't looked into this issue as much as I should be, but honestly, I'd like to have more information. I wish I had the ability to go to England and see Undershaw. Or just visit England, because I'm a huge Beatles fan as well as Sherlock Holmes.
Anyway, I think that this house should be preserved as it was. Too many things are just tossed by the wayside now, in favor of 'modern wonders.' There should be more care taken with things from the past, especially when they've housed such creative minds. It's ironic that so many should remember Conan Doyle for a character he ended up hating because he felt said character overshadowed the more serious writing/other characters that he authored. Yet I think that everyone who is a fan of Sherlock Holmes can appreciate the need to preserve things of the past. For us Holmes fans/fanatics/obsessors, it's always Victorian England, circa 1880-odd.
Okay, I did want to write more, but unfortunately, I'm being interrupted by my hyper little parrot who doesn't seem to want to sit quietly on my shoulder. Instead, he wants to climb everywhere, including on my head, which wouldn't be so bad, if he didn't then lean over and try to preen my eyelashes...
Sherlock In Love Review
One of my interview question has to do with what another author most admires and detests in a Holmes story. When I asked that question to Stephen Seitz, author of Sherlock Holmes and the Plague of Dracula, he didn't name a specific novel or story for 'most admired,' but he certainly had an opinion on the most despised. Sherlock in Love, by Sena Jeter Naslund.
Intrigued by the title, I decided to investigate on everyone's favorite website for books and other miscellaneous items, Amazon. It immediately came up, I read the description, and decided to order it. It came on Monday, I finished it last night, and I wanted to write a review.
I do feel that she has a good grasp of how Watson would write. It's (obviously) not Conan Doyle, but it is very Watsonian-sounding. The first thing I noticed was the very first sentence. "Holmes was dead: to begin with." I'm sorry, but the grammatical perfectionist inside me cringed at that opening line. Why the colon? And I can't help feeling like Watson would say it as, "To begin with, Holmes was dead."
Anyway, I can't find them right now, but there were two spots in the beginning "Present" section that made me pause. I was getting in the Victorian mood, and reading those two bits were like coming to a screeching halt when you're hurtling down the highway at 60 miles an hour. It just threw me completely off for that bit of time.
I also didn't feel it was entirely "Holmes" with how the author decided to have Holmes writing in his journal. Holmes is always hard to do in first person, (believe me, I know that much,) but while it did sound kind of Holmes-ish, I don't know. There was also something off about it that kept it from being authentic.
All in all, honestly, I did like this book. I didn't feel that there was so much of a mystery, at least not with the Victor Sigerson case that Watson reads back on. However, the beginning drew me in and made me want to read more.
It's not the best Holmes pastiche out there, but honestly, I find I can't agree with Stephen Seitz's apparent hatred of this story. I'd give it a 3 out of 5. Not great, but there are many, many worse.
Intrigued by the title, I decided to investigate on everyone's favorite website for books and other miscellaneous items, Amazon. It immediately came up, I read the description, and decided to order it. It came on Monday, I finished it last night, and I wanted to write a review.
I do feel that she has a good grasp of how Watson would write. It's (obviously) not Conan Doyle, but it is very Watsonian-sounding. The first thing I noticed was the very first sentence. "Holmes was dead: to begin with." I'm sorry, but the grammatical perfectionist inside me cringed at that opening line. Why the colon? And I can't help feeling like Watson would say it as, "To begin with, Holmes was dead."
Anyway, I can't find them right now, but there were two spots in the beginning "Present" section that made me pause. I was getting in the Victorian mood, and reading those two bits were like coming to a screeching halt when you're hurtling down the highway at 60 miles an hour. It just threw me completely off for that bit of time.
I also didn't feel it was entirely "Holmes" with how the author decided to have Holmes writing in his journal. Holmes is always hard to do in first person, (believe me, I know that much,) but while it did sound kind of Holmes-ish, I don't know. There was also something off about it that kept it from being authentic.
All in all, honestly, I did like this book. I didn't feel that there was so much of a mystery, at least not with the Victor Sigerson case that Watson reads back on. However, the beginning drew me in and made me want to read more.
It's not the best Holmes pastiche out there, but honestly, I find I can't agree with Stephen Seitz's apparent hatred of this story. I'd give it a 3 out of 5. Not great, but there are many, many worse.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Sherlock Holmes Short Stories
As per Watson in the original Conan Doyle stories, I reference unwritten stories in my own Holmes novels. One such case is mentioned in the Ripper novel on which I'm currently working. The Case of the Sangrove Diamond, I called it. I don't know, the name just came to me, and I liked it. But then I got to thinking about it and decided that I would come up with a plot and write it up as a short story. Then, I was thinking about the Beatles song Eleanor Rigby. I've come up with a short story loosely based on Eleanor Rigby that I can write up as well. And I already had one, thought up a year or so ago called The Mystery of the Haunted Wife. I may wait until five stories strike me, but I'm going to write these three up and hopefully get them published in a volume by MX. I've already given the title of two, but so it's clear:
Sherlock Holmes and the Garden of Sin. The Mystery of the Haunted Wife. The Case of the Sangrove Diamond.
Very short post today, but I'm also reading a book called Sherlock in Love. It was (not) recommended by Stephen Seitz. Honestly, he seems to loathe this book. I'm only about forty pages in, but so far, I'm honestly intrigued. She writes Watson very well, at least so far, and only two instances have made me say, "Hold on a sec..." but not enough for me to stop reading. I'll see if that holds. I'll undoubtedly review it in a few days.
Sherlock Holmes and the Garden of Sin. The Mystery of the Haunted Wife. The Case of the Sangrove Diamond.
Very short post today, but I'm also reading a book called Sherlock in Love. It was (not) recommended by Stephen Seitz. Honestly, he seems to loathe this book. I'm only about forty pages in, but so far, I'm honestly intrigued. She writes Watson very well, at least so far, and only two instances have made me say, "Hold on a sec..." but not enough for me to stop reading. I'll see if that holds. I'll undoubtedly review it in a few days.
Continuing Interview with David Ruffle
It was commented after my first interview with David Ruffle, which can be found here, that it was desired we continue the questions and answers. I decided to oblige and recently sent David several more questions that are posted with his answers below. Happy reading!
1. What do you feel truly makes a Holmes pastiche, and when is it 'just another Holmes story?'
It's easy to be narrow minded and somehow elitist regarding pastiches and stipulate that all true pastiches should be written in the style of ACD and be narrated by Watson. If we all took that as the norm for our Holmesian reading then we would miss out on such much out there that is of the highest quality. I no longer differentiate between pastiches and 'other' Holmes novels....I just appreciate them all on the same level, although my own preference is for 'proper' pastiche.
2. Whether pastiche or 'just a Holmes story,' do you feel there is anything left to be taboo when writing about such an iconic character?
I am not fond of slash/homoerotic Holmes fiction, to my mind it goes a step too far and goes way beyond the characters we know and love. Portraying Holmes and Watson in old age and approaching death or dealing with death itself is just fine with me, after all if we play the game of Holmes and Watson having lived then we must acknowledge they must have died.
3. One thing I noted from looking over my volume of the Canon is that Mrs. Hudson was never the central figure in a story. Why do you suppose that is, and have you ever thought about giving her her own mystery?
I suppose she had a purpose to serve and she served it well. I must admit I haven't thought about making her central to a story although some have.
4. When writing something that has to do with Holmes, how easy and/or difficult is it for you to find the proper 'voice?' Ie - who, if other than Watson, narrates. If you have Watson narrate, being able to write him as if you are Conan Doyle and getting that particular style down.
I love writing as Watson and any praise I get for my Watsonian voice means more to me than any other aspect of my writing. In a way, I do find it easy to write as Watson...not sure why that should be....perhaps I am a Watson myself!
5. And what writing projects do you have planned for the future?
.. An upcoming children's illustrated Sherlock Holmes book...another volume of Tales From The Stranger's Room......and after that...who knows...maybe Holmes and Watson will find themselves in Lyme Regis once more.........
1. What do you feel truly makes a Holmes pastiche, and when is it 'just another Holmes story?'
It's easy to be narrow minded and somehow elitist regarding pastiches and stipulate that all true pastiches should be written in the style of ACD and be narrated by Watson. If we all took that as the norm for our Holmesian reading then we would miss out on such much out there that is of the highest quality. I no longer differentiate between pastiches and 'other' Holmes novels....I just appreciate them all on the same level, although my own preference is for 'proper' pastiche.
2. Whether pastiche or 'just a Holmes story,' do you feel there is anything left to be taboo when writing about such an iconic character?
I am not fond of slash/homoerotic Holmes fiction, to my mind it goes a step too far and goes way beyond the characters we know and love. Portraying Holmes and Watson in old age and approaching death or dealing with death itself is just fine with me, after all if we play the game of Holmes and Watson having lived then we must acknowledge they must have died.
3. One thing I noted from looking over my volume of the Canon is that Mrs. Hudson was never the central figure in a story. Why do you suppose that is, and have you ever thought about giving her her own mystery?
I suppose she had a purpose to serve and she served it well. I must admit I haven't thought about making her central to a story although some have.
4. When writing something that has to do with Holmes, how easy and/or difficult is it for you to find the proper 'voice?' Ie - who, if other than Watson, narrates. If you have Watson narrate, being able to write him as if you are Conan Doyle and getting that particular style down.
I love writing as Watson and any praise I get for my Watsonian voice means more to me than any other aspect of my writing. In a way, I do find it easy to write as Watson...not sure why that should be....perhaps I am a Watson myself!
5. And what writing projects do you have planned for the future?
.. An upcoming children's illustrated Sherlock Holmes book...another volume of Tales From The Stranger's Room......and after that...who knows...maybe Holmes and Watson will find themselves in Lyme Regis once more.........
Saturday, April 14, 2012
Links, Links, and More Links
Loving that Rendezvous is on this list. :)
Please check out this link and "Like" it on FB.
Rendezvous on Goodreads
I Will Find the Answer on Goodreads
I just wanted to include these in today's blog. I do have a few things to write about, but I'll come back when I have more time to do that. In the meantime, please enjoy these links, and I hope you'll pay attention to especially the second one. Oh, and if you haven't reviewed Rendezvous or Answer, please take a moment and rate/comment on it on Goodreads or Amazon.com. Thanks!
Please check out this link and "Like" it on FB.
Rendezvous on Goodreads
I Will Find the Answer on Goodreads
I just wanted to include these in today's blog. I do have a few things to write about, but I'll come back when I have more time to do that. In the meantime, please enjoy these links, and I hope you'll pay attention to especially the second one. Oh, and if you haven't reviewed Rendezvous or Answer, please take a moment and rate/comment on it on Goodreads or Amazon.com. Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)