|
A Sherlock Holmes Trilogy by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Book Description The unmatched wits of Sherlock Holmes are called upon to solve three new mysteries in this fascinating trilogy, sending him and his faithful friend, Dr. Watson, to places throughout Europe during the Victorian and Edwardian periods. Supernatural forces are suspected of murder in the case of The Satyr of Stonehenge, as Holmes and Watson comb the moors around the ancient stones and ultimately find clues to buried treasure. The Edwardian art world is the backdrop for The Curious Connoisseur, taking the reader on a delightful and educational journey into the circles of artists, dealers, collectors, and the lucrative business of art forgery. In The Illusion of Glory, Holmes and Watson make their way through the most treacherous places in World War I era Europe, tracking and undermining the activities of those determined to sabotage world peace and productivity. Old and new friends of Sherlock Holmes are sure to enjoy these three thrilling tales and the often charming, sometimes chilling settings in which they take place. Reader Reviews 1 of 2 people found the following review helpful: Sadly, earlier negative review appears correct, July 25, 2002 Reviewer: wab50 from Baker Street, London (I wish) First, I'll admit that I read only the posted excerpt for this book, so take these comments and the rating with a grain of salt. Just from reading the few pages posted, however, I must concur that the earler negative review of this book is probably correct. In just those few pages, I found numerous sloppy and unnecessary punctuation errors. What's worse, the case in the excerpt is supposed to take place in 1884 -- and yet Watson discusses Holmes' experience with coal tar derivative, which took place during the Great Hiatus of 1891-94; his book, "A Study In Scarlett," which hadn't even see magazine publication in 1884, much less book publication; and the Dreyfus affair, which didn't take place until 1894. Either the author is horribly inept on his historical and Sherlockian facts (which seems unlikely given his back cover bio) or he simply made the careless error of writing 1884 when he meant 1894 and never caught it in proofing the copy. Either way, it doesn't bode well for the rest of the book. Having written a pastiche or two myself, I know it isn't as easy a genre as it may appear, so I'm inclined to be sympathetic toward the author. But he really needs to do a better proofing job in the future--or hire a professional to help out next time.
|
