Customer Reviews

Sherlock Holmes: The Adventure of the Frankenstein Monster

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I purchased this book with great anticipation, but even the introduction was disappointing. Purporting to be yet another lost Watson manuscript, the framing story is that Watson sent the tale of Holmes' adventure to his former girlfriend, Mary Shelley (nee Godwin), and that was the basis for her book. Mary Shelley was born in 1797, published "Frankenstein" in 1818, and died in 1851. The first Sherlock Holmes story was published in 1887, and Watson is portrayed as in his (early?) thirties at the time. Rather precocious, wouldn't you say, to be seeing a woman who died before he was born?

Always willing to reject reality in favor of a good story, I began reading. This author (or publisher) is in dire need of a copy editor and proofreader (and a few lessons in basic grammar). There is constant substitution of "it's" for "its", "bare" for "bear", and at least one instance of "foreward" for "forward". There are a number of punctuation errors. The narration changes tense at least twice, and there are several scenes described in detail by Watson at which he was not present. Castle Frankenstein seems to move back and forth between England and Switzerland, and evidently the Baron has also invented time travel, since the day after Victor's wedding (in Geneva), he and his entourage are in England.

I'm sorry, Mr. Baranowski, but I see this as a total waste of $12.95 and two hours of my life.

I was really looking forward to this book. I've read the Sherlock Holmes Canon and countless pastiches. I read Frankenstein when I was much younger and am a devoted fan of the Universal horror movies. Unfortunately, this book is proof that the whole can be much less than the sum of the parts, The writing style is all over the place: alternately hackneyed, stilted, or over the top. Words are used incorrectly, and I have never seen so many fragments used in lieu of sentences. Sir Arthur would cringe. Holmes is a dolt in this book: As Raven indicates in his review, Baranowski's Holmes doesn't seem able to guess future events which are foreshadowed with all the subtlety of a rampaging bull. The dialogue does not evoke the period, but what is most unforgiveable is that the story adds nothing to the original. Perhaps my disappointment was so profound because my expectations were so high. I am stunned at the charitable reviews this book received from the other reviewers because I found this book a painful waste of time.

This is one of the most poorly written books I have read in a long time. It also suffers from the obvious fact that it was not proof read or edited by the publisher (making me think that the author paid to have it published by a vanity press). The author switches from present tense to past tense in the same paragraph. In one of the early paragraphs in the book, he used the word "old" about five times rather than consult a thesaurus for a synonym. He describes Holmes, Watson, and others going to Switzerland to visit Frankenstein's home and later says that they went from there into Switzerland. There are numerous other problems with the writing. As other reviewers here have stated, he has events from the early 19th century mixing with those from the late 19th century, making me wonder if he knows when "Frankenstein" was written and what time period it covers.

A shopworn plot, & poor characterization, placed in the wrong era.

Holmes + Watson = Late 19th Century.
Frankenstein= Early 19th Century

Frankenstein was written just around the dawn of the Industrial Revolution--Holmes, when it was in full flower. The World had been transformed completely by the time Holmes was first put to paper. 75-odd years of difference, the time it takes to go from being a young man to a great-grandfather.

If the Author had wit enough to suggest the Creature had survived many years, perhaps this might have worked as a novel. He didn't. He made Holmes & Dr Frankenstein contemporaries. Bad move.

This was an enjoyable book to read, once past the odious "How I Found This Manuscript" pages. I could almost tell what they are going to be before I open one of these books. The story takes off with a bang, and there is almost no point of pause from the start to the finish. I read the book in one sitting, and it kept my interest the whole way.

There were two potential weak points concerning Holmes' detection, which if the author doesn't mind, I will point out. I cannot see Holmes failing to foresee, given the formability of the monster and how it kept its word, that Elizabeth would not be in danger of death and leave her unguarded. Two, I do not see Holmes selling Frankenstein so short on his fanaticism, as to allow him to stock the laboratory for the creation of the monster's mate and not foresee that he would move quickly to finish the work. If Mr. Baranowski reprints the book, he might want to reconsider.

My real ding though, is changing the end of the story from the way it ends in Mary Shelly's account. Some things about the classics are best left classic. However, it's an excellent tale. Quoth the Raven...

I cannot remember all the details of the Frankenstein story, however I felt this retelling through the eyes of Dr. John Watson was pretty good. To believe Watson it was he who related the story to one of his lady friends after which she married a poet and retold the tale years later. There did seem to be some reliance on the Frankenstein films however we have an articulate Boris Karloff as "the creature". It is chilling to read, no pun intended as some of the story takes place in the frozen wastelands. Again I have to review the original telling as I was puzzled at how easily Holmes and Watson got back and forth between London and the original Frankenstein locations.

This was rather disappointing if you are looking for a strictly Canonical feel to a pastiche. The crossover did not bother me; it was well-woven. However, the book held multiple grammatical and punctuation errors that were very distracting to me at least.
The main detracting point was the jumping from first to what appears to be a loose third person POV with no warnings - I found that very distracting.

However, the storyline and atmosphere were well-crafted, and it was an enjoyable read if you're looking for a loose (rather loose) rendering of Holmes and Watson and Victorian England.

Definitely well written, worth reading. I bought a total of 3 copies and gave 2 as gifts.