Most Helpful Customer Reviews
76 of 80 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Game's Afoot, January 30, 2004
After the death of her family, Mary Russell, a fifteen year-old, moves to a farm with her "evil" aunt. In one of her walks around the area she meets the famous Sherlock Holmes, who is retired and dedicates his hours to the study of bees. Right from the start the two main characters in the book match their wits and Holmes is surprised by the potential he sees in this young woman. He then decides to tutor her and introduce her to the art of investigative work. In the next few years, they go through a few cases and Mary goes away to Oxford to continue her studies; but at one point they are faced with a more dangerous opponent, who wants to kill not only Holmes, but also Mary; even Dr. Watson and Mycroft are in danger. If you want to know the rest, you better read the book! In my opinion the author does a very good job in maintaining the particular characteristics that define the characters in Arthur Conan Doyle's books, especially in the case of Sherlock Holmes. It is amazing how you feel that the deductive work is done by exactly the same detective you knew from the past, and with the added benefit of a fresh mind assisting him! I was very pleased to see the ingenious way in which Laurie King connected this new series with the Conan Doyle's work. She concocted a story about her receiving the manuscripts of the different stories in the series some time ago, and that she is merely the editor. The manuscripts were of course written by the enchanting Mary Russell. Finally, let me tell you that, since I am an avid chess player, I thoroughly enjoyed the way in which Holmes uses a chess game with Mary to explain the strategy he was planning to utilize in one of their cases. I will definitely continue reading the books in this series, and if you haven't started yet, I recommend you do it now!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
34 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Refreshing take on Sherlock Holmes, October 10, 2002
At least once or twice every year I find myself in a Holmes state of mind. Basil Rathbone makes numerous appearances on my screen at this time and books--by Conan Doyle as well as others--are strewn across the couch. And even though this has been going on for years, my first experience with Mary Russell and Laurie King's Holmes came only two days ago. A new name has indeed been added to my yearly Holmes phase. Laurie King's Holmes is subtle. And it is because of that that he is entirely believable, and what's more, remarkably likeable. As another reviewer noted, under King's hand and through Mary Russell's eyes the aging detective is human, almost fallible. Little gestures, small displays of emotion, makes the reader care about him on a personal level that cannot be reached when he is shown only as the master of deduction. King's treatment of this classic fictional figure has added a new element to my devotion. I absolutely cannot wait to read the rest of the series to see how Holmes progresses in this regard. Russell is a strong protagonist. Admittedly, when I first started the book I had a problem with the fact that she was fifteen years old--the voice didn't seem quite right, or believable. I suppose it's not completely out of the scope of reason that a fifteen year old was/is capable of having a quick, intelligent mind, but one that could compete on a level with Holmes? (One, no less, that had seemingly little challenging education other than the books she constantly had her nose in.) I'm not entirely sure about that. It may just be that she intrigued him with the intelligence she displayed for her age, but that doesn't seem to be the case, at least not totally. I just found it rather curious that King decided to have her meet Holmes at such a young age. However, this was a very little thing in the overall scheme, and it might, in part, be explained away by the fact that she is actually telling the story from an older point-of-view. The set-up of the novel was wonderful in that the first half stayed true to the short stories of Conan Doyle being presented a case at a time as they were. Each case could have been read on its own, but added to the whole picture that the novel made. The final case is the focus, or the main mystery, and is a satisfying one at that. A good challenge for the budding partnership of Holmes and Russell, but not so much for the reader because once the leading clues are given there's very little to figure out from there. If the remaining Mary Russell books are of the same quality as `The Beekeeper's Apprentice' then this series will be a fixture in my personal Holmes library. (As a side note, Carole Nelson Douglas's Irene Adler series pits another strong woman with a brilliant mind against poor Holmes--and she`s straight out of Conan Doyle's story 'A Scandal in Bohemia'.)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
39 of 43 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Pleasant Fantasy, March 21, 2001
I was entertained by this book most of the time but there were some tiresome sections. Much of it was quite repetitive and I felt like the editor needed to have another go at it. I dislike King's tendency (in this book, at least) to summarize what she is going to tell you, tell you, then tell you what she told you. This works for research papers and speeches, not for fiction. The entire Jerusalem trip was completely irrelevant to the plot. And all it did for the characters was that it made Russell feel "more Jewish". Okay, fine. But how did that affect her in the rest of the book? Seemingly not at all. Why send us on a journey and then tell us nothing about it, give it no relevance? My other beef was about Watson. Why make him a doddering idiot? I felt that, more than anything, disrespected the original stories. Maybe she felt she had to make him stupid so that Mary could be set up as Holmes's new partner. But surely that could have been done without besmirching poor Watson. He is supposed to have written the Holmes stories. If so, then how can he be such a dimwit? (Okay, I admit, I'm a Watson fan.) Frankly, it would be nice to have an important supporting character in the book. Lestrade didn't really do a lot, either, though at least he wasn't a moron. Mycroft was vague and helpful. All that being said, and I'm just trying to temper all these "It's perfect!!" reviews, it was fun to contemplate Holmes in a slightly different time and place, and as being not only brilliant, but human and caring. I liked Mary Russell, though she turned into a big drama queen at the end. (Another problem I had - she's been through so much in her life, but one minor bullet wound and she sulks like a Calvin Klein model? It didn't fit!) Overall, though critical, I enjoyed it and plan to read the next book in the series. After that, if there's not too much Watson-bashing, we'll see.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
![[Start the discussion]](http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/x-locale/communities/discussion_boards/start-new-discussion-sec._V192250339_.gif){kind=small}
