Customer Reviews

The Tangled Skein

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Most pastiches which mix Sherlock Holmes and Dracula (Loren Estleman's "Sherlock Holmes vs. Dracula," Fred Saberhagen's "The Holmes-Dracula File," and Stephen Seitz's "Sherlock Holmes and the Plague of Dracula," for example) introduce Holmes into a narrative universe based solidly on the original Bram Stoker novel, then introduce twists within that narrative to account for Holmes's presence and effect. "The Tangled Skein" does not. It is telling that in the author's preface he discusses the impact of the Hammer film versions of Dracula (Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, etc.), because like those films the Dracula plot is completely different from that of the novel--indeed, Van Helsing is the only Stoker character to appear other than the Count himself, whose plot for vampiric domination of England is entirely different than in the original novel and in fact leads to the Dartmoor of "The Hound of the Baskervilles."

This is both good and bad--the fact that the plot itself is entirely original means that the author is not forced into tortured rationalizations to insert Holmes into the Dracula narrative and can instead let it flow freely within its own logic. Likewise, fringe characters from Stoker who would be deprived of their roles in a Holmes story are no longer on hand to clutter up the action. The major problem is that Dracula ceases to be, well, Dracula--without his own narrative behind him, he's just another vampire by the same name, a pale imitator with a certain menace and evil charisma but little story (not entirely unlike Christopher Lee in some of the fringe Hammer films, actually--"Dracula A.D. 1972" and "Dracula, Prince of Darkness" immediately spring to mind).

The plot itself is reasonably functional. The writing is mechanically sound (itself a relief in the increasingly hack-filled world of Holmes pastiches) and reasonably evocative, with the bleak, fog-choked moorlands drawn especially well. The inclusion of the villain of "Hound" as a recurring character (no spoiler, this; he appears immediately as a kind of subplot bridge to get Holmes to the meat of the story) is a major waste of time, being the weakest part of the story (he works even worse as a Batman-type recurring villain than Moriarty has done in a myriad of poor pastiches) and largely as a distraction. Holmes immediately becomes convinced of the reality of vampirism at the appropriate point (Van Helsing steps on the scene to provide a lecture in Undead 101, hand over a stash of useful equipment, and then gets out of the way to leave the stage to Holmes and Watson) without any angsty soul-searching over the deconstruction of his scientific rationalism, but then again, we don't read Holmes for soul-searing angst anyway.

Ultimately, "The Tangled Skein" makes for a reasonable entry in the world of Holmes pastiches for those who don't mind adding the supernatural elements, worth curling up with on a foggy evening. Likewise, it will be enjoyed by fans of Dracula pastiches, particularly those who prefer the pre-1970s Dracula incarnations which are unreservedly evil. Neither group will consider it particularly memorable or stellar, but neither will find it a waste of time...not unlike another entry in the B-picture series that inspired it.

This novel has seen several different editions and printings since its original publication more than a decade ago, but for me it simply did not work.

Basically Holmes and Watson are battling a number of vampires created by Count Dracula, and ultimately face Dracula himself. In order to keep the story going, Holmes blunders badly and repeatedly, nearly once per chapter. I had the feeling that the Holmes here is the original Sherlock's dim-witted twin brother. And Watson is by no means up to the standard. For instance, when a morgue attendant is attacked by a vampire, and knocked out, Watson pays no medical or other attention to him even when an opportunity immediately arises. The action of the plot is almost blitheringly simple-minded throughout, with Holmes and Watson leaving a long string of mutilated, headless corpses lying out in plain sight behind them, apparently with no worries about police or constables.

Now, Count Dracula is a character famously created by Bram Stoker, and the ethics of taking this character and making some relatively minor changes in the original Stoker settings (instead of a sanitarium, there's an exclusive school for girls) and pitting him against Holmes rather than Van Helsing, but otherwise using most of Stoker's basic framework of Dracula setting up house in England, are very, very questionable--- pastiche quickly leaves off, and something far less acceptable and justifiable begins and continues throughout. There's really nothing Holmesian for Holmes to do when faced with nasty-smelling living corpses who fear only holy water, silver bullets and crucifixes (why?).

The writing style is extremely clumsy and simplistic. Davies sounds a lot more like Jan Karon than he does like Conan Doyle, despite using and abusing Conan Doyle's own words in far too many spots. The novel is only barely readable, and always deeply insulting to the reader's intelligence. Even the cover of this edition is misleading, showing Moriarty (who neither appears nor is mentioned) rather than Dracula or Holmes. Give it a wide miss.

Let's face it: this premise (Holmes meets Van Helsing and Dracula) could have gone seriously, seriously awry. And portrayals of Van Helsing and others in recent movies have been nothing short of cringeworthy. Add to that the cottage industry of churning out 'further adventures' of Holmes, most of which, if I may be frank, are either fraught with Mary Sue-isms or hamhanded in execution. I've been disappointed by many of these before, so it was with some hesitation I even persuaded myself to open this short little novel.

Davies's story reads very closely, even to the rhythms of the language, to Stoker. Holmes is a disbelieving man of science, confronted with the ultimate superstition--the existence of vampires. Watson is still faithful, still a step or two behind Holmes. And while we do get the usual hallmarks of Holmes, including Watson being completely duped by Holmes's 'brilliant' disguise, and some of that almost impenetrable deduction from physical appearance, they aren't obligatory 'look, here I'm doing a Holmes story', but are actually integrated into the plot.

It's got a double plot--Stapleton from the Baskerville case is out for revenge, and that story gets folded into the vampire plot, which keeps things cooking along nicely.

Holmes does seem a bit more...ebullient than Doyle wrote him, but Doyle, to my recollection, pitched Holmes off a cliff so he wouldn't have to write about him any more. Davies clearly doesn't have that ambivalence: he loves Holmes and Watson, and loves Stoker as well, and it shows. This is homage in the best sense.

My only criticism is that I think Holmes should come to some greated level of acknowledgement, or at least expansion of his ideas of 'science' and the unknown, by his experiences. Then again, Doyle himself didn't do much 'character development' with Holmes, so I can't really hold Davies's feet to the fire on this.

The introduction to my copy of _Dracula_ calls the Dracula story that of man's "struggle to recover his deepest sense of himself as male," and most impressively of all, Davies's novel continues that 'struggle.'

This is a must-read for Holmes fans and Dracula fans alike. However, keep away from anyone connected with Hollywood or filmmaking. Please!

David Stuart Davies has added another chapter into the growing wealth of the work about Sherlock Holmes, and Dr. Watson. I have been reading the book (not audio book) and have found much to capture my attention, and hold me almost spell bound . The way in which Mr. Davies weaves his plot lines into and out of the Canon stories is most marvellous.
Thrilling is the word which comes to my mind to describe how I feel while reading this story; as the words seem to leap from the page.
This book adds another diminison to the already complex character which is Sherlock Holmes.

Another telling of Holmes vs. Dracula. It's not as good as "Sherlock Hokmes vs. Dracula" but better than "Seance for a Vampire". Bringing Stapleton back did nothing more than pad the thin story and give Holmes a chance to make a deduction about Dracula. Holmes isn't very bright here, at one point he abandons his watch to knowingly walk into a trap. At least he does feel guilty when the girl dies. The descriptions of the vampire killings are far too graphic to believe Watson wrote them, they're more suited to lesser pulp writing than Doyle. Van Helsing is all but reduced to a cameo here, he arrives, tells Holmes about vampire legends and gives him his bag of tricks, then is too busy on his lecture tour to be of help. And Dracula is again powerless in the daytime, not in keeping with Stoker at all. There are a few items of interest to recommend the book. Peter Cushing provides an introduction, where he points out some of the dialogue was "borrowed" from Doyle. He might have added much of the vampire legend dialogue was lifted from his various portrayals of Van Helsing. The book is okay, it's just nothing special and borrows too much from other sources.

This Sherlock Holmes pastiche matches the great detective against Count Dracula. It's set just after 'Hound of the Baskervilles' and refers to that book quite a lot. Holmes and Watson are drawn back to the moors of the Hound and find that Dracula has set up shop there in his bid to spread vampirism across the world.[...]

'Tangled Skein' offers nothing really new on the idea and has little of the 'authentic' feel of other better pastiches.[...] Although the author has cleverly woven Dracula into the story of the Baskervilles the tale lacks any real narrative drive. I found myself skimming the last few chapters. Although the author quotes from Conan Doyle there's little feel of the original stories here.[...]

All in all this is a solid attempt at an interesting idea but one that falls short of the mark left by others. It's not bad, it's just not memorable. [...]

I found this work to be magnificent--- After listening to Sherlock Holmes audio for many years I was enthralled by the magic of this dramatic production... This is not a full cast
attempted by one person but a full cast achieved by one person --
To listen is to believe only this... Listen and be carried away by the genius of this narrator..