Сер Артур Конан Дойл "Шерлок Голмс". "Художник завжди має бути голодним", "генієм можна стати лише після смерті". Фрази, які багато що пояснюють про людську натуру. Вхолосту працювати дуже важко. Але так у тебе є повна свобода щодо своїх творінь. Коли ж стаєш відомим за життя, то дуже важко стриматися й не почати творити на догоду комусь. Для прикладу можна згадати українських поетів, які в свій час зламалися й почали прославляти комунізм. Змішані вже враження про цих людей, чи не так? Конан Дойл створив героя, одного з багатьох. Для автора його творіння як діти: усіх любиш однаково. Але не все ж залежить від тебе. Публіка голосує своїм гаманцем, ти ж лише підкоряєшся. Згадати Голмса в "Етюд у багряних тонах". Він розслідує справу наче грає мелодію на скрипці. Аж до моменту, коли собака ніяк не реагує на першу таблетку. І ця секунда замішання, сумнівів у собі, пошуку помилок і, зрештую, нового висновку багато свідчить про персонажа, як людину. І в перших творах було захоплююче спостерігати за цією грою. Був Ватсон, який не бачив загальної картини і був Голмс, який бачив і розумів абсолютно усе. Вся гра йшла по його правилах. Та потім Дойлу це надоїло. Один лише Шерлок на слуху. І вимагають саме його. Вбивство героя. Щоб звільнитися від того суспільного тиску й далі творити для свого задоволення. Але він вже не контролював ситуацію. Публіка вимагала видовищ. За це і отримала найгіршу з усіх історій - переказ про те, як детектив вижив над водоспадом. Це був злам всього. З детективу звернуло у бік казки. Майже усюди можна сказати, як же Голмсу повезло. Перлина була саме в останньому погрудді, шпигун ведеться на дитячий байт, Ватсон зусиллям волі переборює дію отрути і так у всьому. Залізна логіка поступається випадку. В останній ж збірці Дойл відверто маніпулює ім'ям свого ненависного детектива, щоб розказати байки. Воно вже не має нічого спільного з тими історіями, окрім головних героїв. Чи непогані це історії? Так. Чи розповіді це про Шерлока Голмса? Ні. Ситуація, що надто нагадує сучасні серіали, яким варто було б закінчитися значно раніше, але дзвінка монета вирішила інакше. Ну і окремі претензії до самих книг. Дуже дивно в примітці бачити посилання на твір, в якому вона зустрічається і пропозицію саме там переглянути значення. Ну і я так і не зміг зрозуміти принципу впорядкування історій, якщо в першому тоні все наче йшло по хронології видавництва творів в минулому, то другий том це рандомно розкидані збірки. Також дивно читати в одній історії згадку про якись твір, який буде зустрічатися в книзі значно пізніше. Дивна нелогічність в книзі про логіку. Хоча, якщо дивитися на це все не як на книгу, а як на збірник історій, який варто читати як збірку віршів - відриваєш на рандомній сторінці й читаєш що випало, то, можливо, все буде краще.

The ending was a bit vague and in general although it was satisfying end I wasn't happy with it. I felt that there could have been more to write in terms of Watson's charater and it completely cut off everyone but holmes. I would read it again if I was bored, but otherwise I would probably would not read it again.

Well worth a read.

Many have compared the two volumes of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes in terms of quality and singularity. I have read comments stating that its second collection ─ two novels (The Hound of Baskervilles and The Valley of Fear) and two short story collections (His Last Bow and The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes) ─ fell deeply short of people’s expectations.

But, I would like to set one thing straight. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle has had enough of Sherlock Holmes by 1893. When he wrote “The Final Problem,” Doyle was resolved to kill Sherlock despite the growing demand for his brilliant and remarkable hero.

Why? I see two reasons: first, it was to save himself; second, it was to save Sherlock Holmes.

Doyle did not see himself as a writer in a box. Although the adventures of his Baker Street duo greatly appealed to readers, he continued to explore other genres including fantasy, poetry and historical fiction. Killing off Sherlock had the purest intention, but it unfortunately received the worst reaction. The people of London were utterly disappointed and mad. It took Doyle eight years to give in to their pressures and release The Hound of Baskervilles in 1901 which is the first novel in Volume II.

Doyle knew that the quality of Sherlock’s adventure stories would inevitably decline. Each case required an intricate plot and, in turn, meant a lot of mental work for the writer. Additionally, the public’s demands and his publisher’s deadlines did not make it easier. This is why I empathize with Doyle. He wanted to preserve the greatness of Sherlock Holmes without the influence of fandom.

The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes Volume II revived Sherlock in print, yet some people would say that it did not carry the same fire. Maybe, maybe not. But one thing’s for sure, kudos to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle for writing such superb work.

Blog Post: https://wp.me/p5O4fv-5ks

This was a collection of short stories about how Sherlock Holmes, a famous detective, solved a multitude of mysteries. It is narrated by John Watson, Holmes friend and sidekick. Since this is a collection of shorter stories, I’ve chosen to summarize one of the longer and more complex stories: The Tragedy of Birlstone. In this story, Holmes is asked by British detectives to assist them with the murder of Mr. Douglas of Birlstone. The crime scene makes it appear that Douglas was shot in the face by a robber, and the robber, realizing he had raised alarm, fled the house. Holmes, however, upon investigating the scene, finds many flaws in that theory, and begins to discover what really happened. He questions the wife, family friend (Mr. Barker), Butler, and maid, and finds that the wife and Mr. Barker must be hiding something. Holmes, being more reserved, leaves Watson in the dark as Holmes evolves his theory. Finally, Holmes invites Watson and the British detectives with him one night to the house. Holmes and his company wait to see if Holmes experiment prove results. Holmes had given Mr. Barker false information in order to prove his theory, which he has yet to tell anyone, wishing to make it more dramatic when he reveals the truth. When Mr. Barker appears at a certain window as Holmes predicted, he led them into the house, and laid bare the entire mystery except for the motive. What truly happened in the Tragedy of Birlstone was that an unknown enemy of Douglas's came to murder him. Douglas had caught this person, and, in an act of self defense, had shot the intruder in the face, making him mistakable for himself. He then took Barker and his wife into his confidence of his past secrets, and together they faked Douglas's death. Holmes had figured all this out, and brought Douglas out of his hiding. Douglas then gave Watson a papers telling about his past and motive for hiding. Douglas was Birdy Edwards, a retired American detective responsible for the collapse of a serial killer gang. Though Edwards broke up the gang, not all the members were convicted, including some who wanted Edwards dead. So, Edwards changed his name and travelled to California, where he met Barker, but his enemies discovered him, and he moved to England. There he married Mrs. Douglas and settled at Birlstone, but even there his life was attempted, leading to the murder of his pursuer.
This story and many of the others in this collection followed a similar plot. The themes, however, changed depending on the motive for the crime, which added diversity to what would otherwise be a repetitive version of events throughout the book. This book has appealed to me in a very logical way. It is a organized line of thought once Holmes explains his thinking. It challenged me in more than just the reading level, but in trying to figure out the crime as I read.

I have always loved Sherlock Holmes' books, but I feel like reading too many of them in a row sort of spoiled them for me a little bit. . . also, I always thought that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle did in-depth research before writing each story, but it turns out that a lot of his "facts" were way off-base. I feel sort of cheated of my childhood hero! But they are still very well-written, and are definitely classic.

Un placer ver reunidas las historias del gran Sherlock. Buenos misterios y una gran imaginación para suplir los modernos artefactos de distracción.

After 1400 pages of Holmes, I'm still not tired of him.

A well written book. Enjoyed reading it.

A fascinating book. Some of the phylosphy that Sherlock Holmes uses , can be applied in real world. It is a really constructive and interesting book .

Still a classic! ACD's writing is stellar & the man sure knew how to engage his readers. Yes, there is some racism & misogyny, along an abundance of British class distinctions. So if you are into presentism you will definitely need to confront your tendency to apply present-day attitudes to the past.

This series "The complete Sherlock Holmes" Volumes 1 & 2 were a pleasure to read. Discovering all the famous lines and actions was a delight. Most folks know the basics, but reading it all was an education. The only negative I have is the font or type set of these books is very small. Making them a bit of a challenge for these old eyes. But maybe then, that is a good thing.