the first couple adventures were good, but then it just got predictable as hell. i'm done with Sherlock for forever.

One of the most compelling series of short stories ever written, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle manages to structure the tales of Sherlock Holmes as a literary journey were one as a reader can discover not only the witty logic that has made of him the best detective in literature but also hints of his humanity, morality and philosophy.
Through the pen of Watson we approach many mysteries that exercise one's intelligence while developing a rapport with the characters and their journey.
One of the most engaging books I've read, definitively.

Somehow I've never read any actual Arthur Conan Doyle Sherlock stories before so this random collection my mom has from across his career seemed like a good place to start. As a very passionate BBC Sherlock fan it was crazy to see how similar those episodes actually are to the real stories (right down to the Johnlock crumbs and Sherlock being just one of the girls fr). The only downside is that I found myself wanting the stories to be longer to get more of the process of the investigation instead of Sherlock just telling Watson what he thinks happened, so I will definitely check out the full length novels next. My favorite stories: The Adventure of the Speckled Band, A Scandal in Bohemia, The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist, & The Boscombe Valley Mystery.

Here's the deal: The edition I'm reviewing (ISBN 1-59609-176-2, "The Chamberlain Bros. Edition", published by Signet Classics, which is part of Penguin), gets high marks for the introduction by Anne Perry, the essay by William R. Pace and the 22 stories by Arthur Conan Doyle. But the DVD is much as I expected, Watson! The selling point of this volume is that it comes with a DVD featuring two Basil Rathbone Sherlock Holmes movies. But the print of TERROR BY NIGHT is so bad it might as well have been burned on somebody's home computer. I didn't bother to check if the second movie was in any better shape. TERROR BY NIGHT is a great old movie, but there is no restoration of it here. The sound on is very muffled and the images are washed out. I bought this book and DVD package because last night Turner Classic Movies showed TERROR BY NIGHT and I was intrigued. Turner's print, of course, had been brought to dazzling condition by Ted Turner's staff of geniuses. I imagine it's available on a high-quality DVD from another company, but Penguin clearly used whichever print it stumbled upon. This is a shame, because the idea of packaging classic books with classic movie adaptations is right on the money. A lot of colleges have courses comparing books to the movies made out of them. Is Penguin hoping to take advantage of hapless college students? The disclaimer on the little envelope holding the DVD says it all: "The software media is distributed on an 'AS IS' basis, without warranty." Also, the back cover of the book says the Introduction is by Frederick Busch. This contradicts the title page, which says Anne Perry wrote it. Indeed, the book contains Anne Perry's introduction and nothing by Frederick Busch. The introduction is set in a different font from the rest of the book. That may be a stylistic decision, but I doubt it. Why has such a good concept been given this slipshod treatment? Why has Penguin, so scrupulous as it is about classic literature, so cavalier when it comes to film?

I was reading in the introduction how the 19th Century British public reacted to Doyle's killing off of Holmes when he got tired of writing the stories - they were indignant. I found myself relating to how they fell in love with the characters of Holmes and Watson - I did too! I don't think Holmes would have been as good-looking as Robert Downey Jr., but the movie did a good job of portraying Holmes' obsessive nature and ideosyncracies.

Here's how every single one of these stories begins and ends:

1) somebody in distress arrives at Holmes' door and tells him about a case because he is well known and they can't go to police or are afraid for their life
2) Holmes and Watson listen to their trouble and Holmes takes the case on (usually not much convincing beyond one or two aspects that are mysterious)
3) They go to another location where they meet, observe, or talk to somebody who witnessed the murder/robbery/kidnapping
4) Holmes figures out (mainly by pulling it out of his ass or being EXTREMELY lucky in his guesses) how to catch the murderer/robber/kidnapper(s) by observing or setting up trap. Keep in mind he keeps all those around him in dark about his thoughts for most of the time. He never exposits his theories until the end, when they are ALWAYS true.
5) They catch the criminal in the act and make him/her tell them everything - which ties into what Holmes what thinking and/or the clues he told us or Watson (who is usually pretty useless - Holmes even strikes his opinions down a lot and once even yelled at him for not being helpful).

Rinse and repeat. All of the stories in this collection are set up like this. There is a lot of times I yelled "HOW DID YOU COME TO THAT CONCLUSION?" when things didn't make any sense but were taken as facts because Holmes said it. I understand a lot of people like these stories but I have a rational mind and I questioned a lot of things in these stories. You can say I overthink things and that is fine, but my mind won't let me enjoy things when they are riddled with inconsistencies/plot holes. Setting them in the 1800s doesn't help, but it can be entertaining time period.

For example, in "THE ADVENTURE OF THE DANCING MEN" it started off being so intriguing that I couldn't stop reading it. It had bunch of drawings that kept me wondering what they meant and which culture uses them. Then Holmes comes out and DEDUCTS that these mean letters based on this idea that the little figures mean certain letters because some letters are really common in the English language. It was all crap. I was hanging on to every word until this - just couldn't suspend my belief this much and take it anything but miracle that Holmes solved it. If he said the writing is from a lost Tanzanian tribe that lived on Earth 2,000 years ago, I would have bough it faster than this pull-it-out-of-my-ass crap. Keep in mind that Holmes actually once said he knows 42 (or was it 62?) strands of tobacco and can identify them by look/taste instantly. He is Jesus of the detective world.

Anyway, kudos to those that enjoy these stories and kudos to Doyle for entertaining so many people over the years, but my enjoyment wouldn't stretch beyond 3 stars - and even that was pushing it. Just because everyone enjoys these stories doesn't mean I have to.

I've never been a fan of short stories, but these simply WORK. Very enjoyable and with a flair that few authors capture.

For the full review (and to see how I can truly link ANYTHING to Lost), visit the link at That's What She Read.

Read for Senior Summer Book in August.

I've never read Sherlock before and it was pretty interesting. I liked the mysteries and all. My favorite was the Solitary Cyclists the best. The Final Problem was the hardest to get through because it wasn't really a mystery, it was just showing how Sherlock was running from Moriarty.
It kept my interest and hopefully the test will be easy.

Short stories to read while waiting -- doctor's office, plane trips, etc. The characters in these stories are painted so vividly, they're almost alive. Some of them even showed up in my dreams afterwards, as if I knew them!

This is the second round of reading these Holmes short stories by Doyle. I greatly enjoy them. The repartee between Holmes, Watson and the assortment of police inspectors they come across on their cases is so enjoyable.

it took me SO LONG to get through this! the writing's a little dry (obvs) so i could only do a few stories at a time without taking a break.

the stories varied in their entertainment value, but there were some that i really really enjoyed. i mean, i liked all of them, i just liked some more than others. my only complaint with this edition is that (a) it doesn't tell you what order the stories are in (publication order? chronological order? some other random order?) and it doesn't tell you what years they were published. it was hard to suss out the behind the scenes stuff and how the stories related to each other without this info!

it was a really fun introduction to holmes though, and i solved a few of the mysteries before he did, which made me happy. (please don't point out that years of watching/reading things that rip off sherlock holmes have somewhat spoiled me. i like feeling smart.)