Customer Reviews

The Beekeeper's Apprentice: A Novel

5 star:		(157)
4 star:		(43)
3 star:		(14)
2 star:		(9)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

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!

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'.)

I must say, this is one of my favorite books in the world. I first read it 5 years ago and it has never grown old. Anytime I am without a book to read, I pull it out and, once again, I am caught up in the world of Sherlock Holmes.

The book is about Mary Russel, a 15 year old girl who one day meets a retired Sherlock Holmes near his home on the Sussex countryside. She instantly catches his attention and becomes his protege for the next few years. Being an orphan, she is practically adopted by Holmes, who teaches her many skills that are useful in their line of work. When Russell turns 18, she goes off to Oxford to study-of all things-theology. While there, Holmes is attacked by a mysterious enemy who's plan is to not only hurt Holmes, but his close friends as well. This leads Holmes and Russell on a daring chase for a suprising enemy. And as their search goes on, Russell grows from being Holmes' student into his partner.

I have always found the Sherlock Holmes in Laurie R. King's books to be much more sociable, and likable, than the Holmes in Conan Doyle's books. Conan Doyle made him out as an omnipotent, all-powerful being. In Laurie R. King's books you see the more human side of him.

I've enjoyed all of Laurie R. King's books in this series. They are, so far, in order: The Beekeeper's Apprentice, A Monstrous Regiment of Women, A Letter of Mary, The Moor, and O Jerusalem. I would recommend these books to anyone, especially someone who loves a good mystery.

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.

I read "The Beekeeper's Apprentice" about a year ago. When I first glanced at the blurb, I was tempted to laugh. Imagine undermining the great Sherlock Holmes by teaming him up with a fifteen-year old girl! It was almost too ridiculous to believe. Nevertheless, I borrowed the book from my local library, and since then, it has become one of my fabourite books ever. I bought my very own copy of it three months ago.

The story is amazing. Supposedly written by an aged Mary Russell (a fifteen year-old girl at the beginning of the story), the book is a recount of her life from her meeting with the fifty-three-year-old Sherlock Holmes, to when she is about 19. Her narration, what she chooses to dwell on in her telling, and what she merely skips over, not only reveals to the reader which incidents most live in her memory, but also makes the story fast-paced, and vividly exciting.

The book also shows a quite different Sherlock Holmes to the stories of Conan Doyle. While every bit as brilliant and perceptive, the Holmes we see through Mary Russell's eyes is very much human, capable of mistakes and intense emotion. Much as I tend to idolise the Legend of Conan Doyle, I can't help but warm towards the picture painted by Mary Russell far more than that of the good Doctor.

I was miserable when I finished "The Beekeeper's Apprentice", so much so that I was almost crying. And I have to admit that I cried during the book, too, and still do when I reread it. I have read the other Russell-Holmes novels, but none come close to this, the first. Such is the fate of all but the most brilliant of serials. This is Laurie R. King's masterpiece, her other works cannot compare.

First thing first: I am perhaps the biggest Sherlock Holmes fan in Southwestern Ohio. This being said, I hate to come across anything in writing, official or even fan fiction, that inaccurately portrays my favorite detective. Anything from dear Holmes falling in love with a cliched Mary Sue to Watson meeting a horrible demise, I would refuse to pick it up or even give it a glance. Which was why I was so turned off from this book at first.

Luckily, my best friend's mother is an English teacher, and she found out (see "couldn't help but notice") my love for all things Conan Doyle had graced. The first thing she did was suggest The Beekeeper's Apprentice to me. "Just read the first five pages," she told me, "and if you don't like it, just give it back." As soon as I registered the first sentence, I was hooked.

The plot has been recited on this page many times before, so I won't indulge, simply try to pique your interest. Rarely does a book grab my attention so as to make me literally perch on the edge of my seat, or want to sink far back into the cushions. I've always been ridiculed by my friends for letting a tear stray down my face when a particular passage was weep-worthy, but never before have I felt like bursting into tears just because the book was OVER. It is one of those books that, after being unable to leave your chair for hours (quite out of your power to put it down) that you feel that you must run 20 laps in order to let loose all of the emotions inside.

This book is not for the unread or uneducated. You have to have some wit about you in order to decipher the pages, and a considerable knowledge of Holmes Cannon would be optimal. But you do not NEED to. Bring only your love for literature and appreciation for the written word, and you will be pleased by this cunning, stunning and heart-warming novel starring the greatest detective of all time: Mr. Sherlock Holmes.

The Beekeeper's Apprentice, being the first of the Holmes/Russell novels, establishes the world of Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes which will only be further developed and brought together in her later novels. Having read the first four (out of five so far), I have fallen in love with King's Holmes as much as I love Doyle's. We see Holmes in two very different stages of life, and with two very different people--As a matter of fact, he is portrayed -by- two totally different people. Mary Russell, the narrator and "author" of what fans call the Kanon, depicts Holmes in a very different way than Watson does in the Doyle Canon. Why? Because she sees him differently. Mentally, she is his equal. She is an audacious and modern woman, while Watson almost puts Holmes on a pedastol--and he is a strict Victorian gentlemen. No doubt their views on Holmes would be different. It's a shame that there are only second-person accounts of the Great Detective--Those who have read the Canon and the Kanon will long for a first-person tale from Holmes himself.

This particular novel, The Beekeeper's Apprentice, is my favourite of the Kanon. The initial scene between Holmes and Russell is priceless, and is something I'll remember for the rest of my life. The narration is exquisitely charming and you can sense from how it is written that Mary Russell is a scholar, not a novelist (while Laurie R. King, if you read her other work from a third-person standpoint, is very much a storyteller--it just goes to show how far she goes for character and separating herself from Russell). Dialogue between Holmes and Russell is edgy and intelligent, and the chemistry between the two is phenomenal. Holmes's character remains full and intact, and we see sides of him Watson never was able to explore. Character traits that were two-dimensional in the Canon are brought into three dimensions in the Kanon, and we see precisely how human and real this genius of a man really is. The entire novel, as well as the rest of them, contains such a reality and charm that one can swear that the characters really existed. The only thing that I found to be strange was the trip to Jerusalem in the middle of the book. There didn't seem to be much of a point to it--However, at that time I didn't realize that the fifth book in the Kanon, O Jerusalem, takes us back to that point in Beekeeper's Apprentice and explains, in four hundred pages, precisely what went on there. It was left out of The Beekeeper's Apprentice because it was an entirely disassociated mystery.

Even grizzled Baker Street Irregulars will enjoy this book--In fact, the people that seem to complain about the Holmes/Russell relationship the most are the people that haven't even read the Kanon at all. It's sure to charm even the hardest Holmes purist, and give others a glimpse into the humanity of Holmes, whereas the Doyle books were mainly about the adventure and the mystery. It's a brilliant start to an even better series, and I recommend it to those both familiar and unfamiliar with Sherlock Holmes.

I have to admit that I love this book. I think that I first read it at the time of my greatest Holmes obsession when I read anything at all related to Holmes. (Now I only read almost anything related to Holmes.) But I still had severe doubts when I discovered the premise. Really, it seems like this book shouldn't be good, but it's excellent. Mary Russell is a marvelous character, brilliant, opinionated, and best of all, the age I was when I was literally in love with Holmes. And King's Holmes is the best I have discovered outside of the real thing, Doyle's own creation. He's true to the original but with a lot of added dimensions. And though Mary is only a teenager you can already discern that the intellectual tension between her and Holmes may lead to something more in the future. I recommend The Beekeeper's Apprentice highly for open-minded Sherlockians--especially women, I have to add. This is the first and best of the Holmes-Russell series. A Monstrous Regiment of Women and A Letter of Mary are very good but not quite on the same level, and I found The Moor and O Jerusalem just a little uninteresting, at leat in comparison. Still, I'd rather read any of them than almost any other non-Doyle Holmes books.

Laurie King is not your average mystery author. Not only does she spin a carefully-crafted plot, she develops delicious characters and relationships, and does it all with a delightful sense of humor, page-turning momentum, and literary grace. In short: a rare combination of real writing talent, and great fun!

This book is the perfect kick-off. Once you read it, you're hooked! Her other books in the series are just as good; although there's something about the 15 year-old Mary Russel that has drawn me back to this particular book more than once. I especially love her first encounter with Holmes!

WARNING: I've seen NUMEROUS reviews, and even comments on the back cover of her books, that spoil a major plot point in the second book of the series! I recommend not indulging in any more reviews, or even reading small quotes about the series, if you can help it...just buy it, and read it. Trust me, the payoff is worth it! You'll thank me when you relish the last few pages of her second book--which may very well be the most satisfying ending of any book I've read, and one of the best surprises.

Enjoy!

The Beekeepers Apprentice was recommended to me by a fellow avid reader and with great doubt, I hesitantly and reluctantly began to read. With the first page, Ms. King's writing grabbed me and held on till until the end of the book. Thus began a love affair with everything she writes. I avidly wait and watch for her next novel, especially in this sublime series and gobble it up as soon as I get it.

Beekeeper's Apprentice is a great book for any Conan Doyle fan, a lover of literature or just about anyone. It is intelligent and witty, funny and suspenseful. The historical background is well researched and wonderful.

I loved re-visiting Dr. Watson, loved seeing Sherlock Holmes as bored out of his mind with retirement, loved Mary Russell.

Buy this book, read it and then buy the next. Better yet, buy them all so that you can read them one after the other in total book gluttony.