Well...
It was an interesting book. And since I have a tendency to get lost in my thoughts and wander of track I'm gonna list what I want to cover in this post.
Similarity to Holmes' Stories
....how plot relates
....The characters relate
....Conclusion (how differ)/loose ends
....Supernatural
The link present between the two.
And overall opinion.
So... the plot.
Typically in a Holme's likeplot there is a evident/puzzling problem. In Hounds it was that someone had died and they were wondering how/what caused it and how to prevent it from happenign on the next heir. In a Study in Scarlet..it was that someone had been killed in a very stange way and they were trying to solve the murder.
In this one however, it was that the main character, Doyle, had been unwittingly been "targeted by a diabolical coven of satanists - the Dark Brotherhood" according to the book jacket. He witnesses a murder, which is what first pulls him into the story... however the plot does not revolve around solving the murder. (Well it vaugely does but that is not the centerpoitn of the story) The main plot revloves around "tracking" the group of Satanists that are practicing dark magic to find out exactly what they are doing and why... because there is no otber option essentially.
Because Doyles life is being atacked by them.. and staying in one place alone will prove fatal... since they are tracking him down.
So they follow these leads and you find out more and more about the group of atttackers. And so they connect the clues. But, though they follow clues and hints that lead them towards discovering what is really happening and though DOyle has the same logical skills that Holmes has... it's almost by chance that they find out what's going on. THere aren't any alternative theories that go on in his head with circumstancial evidence... without strange and uncertain evidence. Everything is pretty straightforward.. .blah blah bought this land... whoever has this job... blank is a very evil and crazy person. the only bit of unsure linking together occurs as the end of the book when Doyle is tryign to save his own life and makes lucky guesses... which he himself admits to. ..."Doyle chanced his most daring leap of the offensive... and you are currently preparin a second attempt becuase your first effort - involving the birth of youyr son... has sadly and tragically failed".... Doyle had gambled and come up aces". --very unHolmesy.
Holmes knows exactly what he's doing
Jumping to how the stories relate... according to Doyle.... Sparks who is a person wiht similar logical skills to him is who he bases the stories of Sherlock Holmes on. But though its interesting to think of it in that way.... besides his keen logical skills, he is very unsimilar to HOlmes. Sparks, who is another main character that helps Doyle out a lot and whom is tracking down these people, doesn't balance theoriesi out liek Holmes, but rather is a man of action and disguise that solves cases by lauching right into them. For example, he pretends to be a patient of a doctor because he's tryign to figure out information on them. Truthfully he also resembles a bit of Dr. Kreizler from the Alienist and the Angel of Darkness because Sparks, like Kreizler retrains/corrects/helps criminals become good citizens again that help him with their skills instead of using them against the law.
For refereces to teh supernatural... I think i already covered some of it in a previous post.... so moving a long. THe conclusion..
A lot of pieces tied together towards the end... and information that made no sense in the beginning makes more sense in the end..
But, i felt there were a lot of things left up in the air. We finally understand a little more of the supernatural forces... of why mummies come back a live. But, I still don't understand about the "grey hoods" which could move at great speeds and power.. blah blah... If tbat's true then how are they formally people?... and more than that... people that have had their souls taken away from them for absolute obedience? If they are lifeless people like that... then how do they have this great spped adn power about them? Maybe I missed something along the way.
What i didn't like about the book also was that there were a lot of different pieces and elements that eventually tied together in some way or another... but a lot of it was almost irrelevant/unnessecary.. The plot would have been simpler, clearer and made more sense if it wasn't so intricate - and the intricate was unnecessary in my opinion.
So.. though this has a lot of allusions to the Holme's stories and is set in Victorian England... I really don't think it has quite the same elements of Holme's storise that I had expected.
In its own sense it was entertaining though.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Deduction and Logic (Hounds)
So... while reading through the Hound of the Baskervilles I read a part talking about deductions that struck me.. now lets just see if i can find it.
Here it is. From early on.. don't know the page number..
. That may point to carelessness or it may point to agitation and hurry upon the part of the cutter. On the whole I incline to the latter view, since the matter was evidently important, and it is unlikely that the composer of such a letter would be careless. If he were in a hurry it opens up the interesting question why he should be in a hurry, since any letter posted up to early morning would reach Sir Henry before he would leave his hotel. Did the composer fear an interruption -- and from whom?"
"We are coming now rather into the region of guesswork," said Dr. Mortimer.
"Say, rather, into the region where we balance probabilities and choose the most likely. It is the scientific use of the imagination, but we have always some material basis on which to start our speculation. Now, you would call it a guess, no doubt, but I am almost certain that this address has been written in a hotel."
"How in the world can you say that?"
"If you examine it carefully you will see that both the pen and the ink have given the writer trouble. The pen has spluttered twice in a single word and has run dry three times in a short address, showing that there was very little ink in the bottle. Now, a private pen or ink-bottle is seldom allowed to be in such a state, and the combination of the two must be quite rare. But you know the hotel ink and the hotel pen, where it is rare to get anything else.
Well here's another example of the deductions... but Dr. Mortimer touched on what I had my complaint about... Guessing and the probabilities he'd get it wrong. Stuff like the hotel pen/ink i can believe because it make sense. And has some more concrete reasoning behind it. However, for the interruption part... though it makes sense too, it seems more like an edcated guess.. Burt yet again that is exactly what he does all the time, make an educated guess based on his surroundings and the evidence presented. He just happens to be right most of the time - which might come from experience or whatever.
I just needed to blog on this... becuase truthfully I'm becoming more convinvced that Holmes knew exactly what he was talking about. First. He had the experience from all his experiments adn cases... and also he had a tendency not to reveal his thoughts to others unless he was positively certain of it. He also didn't lend himself to other people's theories and didn't form any definite ones of his own (with multiple circultating) until there was direct evidence. Little things that escaped us meant were defnite leads to him.
For example... when one of the boots disapear from the Baronet... we don't understand it but Holmes recognizes immediateley that it must be a real hound and not a supernatural one involved. yet he doesn't relate this to Watson.
Alrighte.. of to dinner and Merry Christmas to all since i forgot in the last post!
Here it is. From early on.. don't know the page number..
. That may point to carelessness or it may point to agitation and hurry upon the part of the cutter. On the whole I incline to the latter view, since the matter was evidently important, and it is unlikely that the composer of such a letter would be careless. If he were in a hurry it opens up the interesting question why he should be in a hurry, since any letter posted up to early morning would reach Sir Henry before he would leave his hotel. Did the composer fear an interruption -- and from whom?"
"We are coming now rather into the region of guesswork," said Dr. Mortimer.
"Say, rather, into the region where we balance probabilities and choose the most likely. It is the scientific use of the imagination, but we have always some material basis on which to start our speculation. Now, you would call it a guess, no doubt, but I am almost certain that this address has been written in a hotel."
"How in the world can you say that?"
"If you examine it carefully you will see that both the pen and the ink have given the writer trouble. The pen has spluttered twice in a single word and has run dry three times in a short address, showing that there was very little ink in the bottle. Now, a private pen or ink-bottle is seldom allowed to be in such a state, and the combination of the two must be quite rare. But you know the hotel ink and the hotel pen, where it is rare to get anything else.
Well here's another example of the deductions... but Dr. Mortimer touched on what I had my complaint about... Guessing and the probabilities he'd get it wrong. Stuff like the hotel pen/ink i can believe because it make sense. And has some more concrete reasoning behind it. However, for the interruption part... though it makes sense too, it seems more like an edcated guess.. Burt yet again that is exactly what he does all the time, make an educated guess based on his surroundings and the evidence presented. He just happens to be right most of the time - which might come from experience or whatever.
I just needed to blog on this... becuase truthfully I'm becoming more convinvced that Holmes knew exactly what he was talking about. First. He had the experience from all his experiments adn cases... and also he had a tendency not to reveal his thoughts to others unless he was positively certain of it. He also didn't lend himself to other people's theories and didn't form any definite ones of his own (with multiple circultating) until there was direct evidence. Little things that escaped us meant were defnite leads to him.
For example... when one of the boots disapear from the Baronet... we don't understand it but Holmes recognizes immediateley that it must be a real hound and not a supernatural one involved. yet he doesn't relate this to Watson.
Alrighte.. of to dinner and Merry Christmas to all since i forgot in the last post!
The use of the Supernatural (Hounds and List)
So... I finished reading the Hounds of the Baskervilles, and after having finsihed everything clicks together and makes sense.
But, I can't say that I liked the book very much. It took several reads for me to finish it, unlike other books like the Alienest which kept me addicted til the end. Similarly the List of 7, which I'm reading at the same time, isn't enrapturing me as much - probably because of the supernatural forces involved (which are creeping me out).
But, now I understand why the Italian secretary ended up not being too mysterious/supernatural - and why it was so similar to the Hounds of the Baskervilles. That is becuase, although there exists the possibility that supernatural forces are involved, like ghosts and enourmous hounds, they really do not exist, and thus there are logical explanations for them- which is what a lot of Sherlock Holmes is based on - though there are strange and almost impossible cases, there always exists a logical explanation for it.
In the list of 7, that's not the case. (Which i do not like because there are supernatural forces that are not explanable through logic and reasoning, which are the trumping forces of the hero--so how do they end up winning? Reasonign and logic fail and are inferior when talkign of supernatural forces like magic) It kind of ruins the faith we have in the power of the hero to triumph. It makes the stories more like a Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings one where the hero has to rely on aid, or faith in oneself... instead of something as definite as logic.
So, although the List of 7 includes Doyle (whose reasoning skills are as sharp as that of Holmes) Ex. "Your vivid imagination leads me to believe you were invalid in childhood - during which you entertained yourself by reading ovoraciously, a habit you m,aintain to this day....my family did travel regularly through Europe, particularly Germqany.... you bear the natural confidence and ambition of an eldest and only child...
These little observations adn the conclusion drawn from them are very similar to those of Holmes. But the fact that it's almost Sci-Fi and Magical draw a fine line between the two, in my opinion. The style/plot reminds me more of, like i said before a HP story.... Dealing with Holmes'ish stuff, I didn't expect for the supernatural (what other word is there for that?).
My thoughts are getting disorganized and I think I'm done talkign bout Supernatural... so next post.
But, I can't say that I liked the book very much. It took several reads for me to finish it, unlike other books like the Alienest which kept me addicted til the end. Similarly the List of 7, which I'm reading at the same time, isn't enrapturing me as much - probably because of the supernatural forces involved (which are creeping me out).
But, now I understand why the Italian secretary ended up not being too mysterious/supernatural - and why it was so similar to the Hounds of the Baskervilles. That is becuase, although there exists the possibility that supernatural forces are involved, like ghosts and enourmous hounds, they really do not exist, and thus there are logical explanations for them- which is what a lot of Sherlock Holmes is based on - though there are strange and almost impossible cases, there always exists a logical explanation for it.
In the list of 7, that's not the case. (Which i do not like because there are supernatural forces that are not explanable through logic and reasoning, which are the trumping forces of the hero--so how do they end up winning? Reasonign and logic fail and are inferior when talkign of supernatural forces like magic) It kind of ruins the faith we have in the power of the hero to triumph. It makes the stories more like a Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings one where the hero has to rely on aid, or faith in oneself... instead of something as definite as logic.
So, although the List of 7 includes Doyle (whose reasoning skills are as sharp as that of Holmes) Ex. "Your vivid imagination leads me to believe you were invalid in childhood - during which you entertained yourself by reading ovoraciously, a habit you m,aintain to this day....my family did travel regularly through Europe, particularly Germqany.... you bear the natural confidence and ambition of an eldest and only child...
These little observations adn the conclusion drawn from them are very similar to those of Holmes. But the fact that it's almost Sci-Fi and Magical draw a fine line between the two, in my opinion. The style/plot reminds me more of, like i said before a HP story.... Dealing with Holmes'ish stuff, I didn't expect for the supernatural (what other word is there for that?).
My thoughts are getting disorganized and I think I'm done talkign bout Supernatural... so next post.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Italian Secretary: The Plot/Excitment
So. Plot. Of Course.
Sherlock Holmes would be nothing without his ingenious plot. Why? Because if what he solved were just ordinary random murders/or burglaries - there'd be no fun in it becuase one, it is ordinary (SO it won't grab our attention) and two ordinary and solved a gazillion times already murders don't showcase the intelligence and ability of our genius mastermind.
So, the plot is always essential. So, for the aforementioned reasons, it must be "different", "weird", and well, original. Weird, in particular, because it makes it difficult for ordinary people like the police at Scotland Yard, but easier for someone like Holmes because it holds an indication towards something else/can lead him to the right trail.
But anyways....
back to the plot. The Italian Secretary had quite a longer amount of time to develop the characters and introduce the plot - since it was well, a novel with over 300 pages. The Holmes stories are much less, probalby less than half or even 1/3 of the size sometimes-yet they still achieve the same appeal, ingeniouity and etc.
Ok... to start again.
The plot involves the murder of two people under the employment of the Queen to renovate the castle. It's strange because there is seemingly no logical answer to what the motive is.... and because there is a fear of ghosts. There's some info on the murder of a secretary and ect. that they believe haunt the castle where the two people were killed.
But anyways, part of the "weird" was the fact that every bone in the body was broken, yet no blood had flown out?? Something like that.. Essentially it was strange that every bone was broken. And there was great confusion on how it was humanly possible.
Then they uncover a motive and find someone that tells them a lot of info... Then we're still lost but Holmes gets it. And then he arranges stuff and we're off to find/meet the killer. That done, we have the final showdown (Which i think is actually more of a Celeb Carr thing then Doyle... tell me what you think from what you know about it).... where there's big risk of people dying - and actually some people do die, just not the important ones.... and other's are at teh risk of dying ... etc. etc.
But, of course, admiss the fighting and all they continue alive, and end up winning and the villains captured/thier plot foiled.
Part of the thriller aspect (which I'm not sure if its included in Holme's stories...or at least to the extent of Carr)... is the risk of thier lives all the time and the final climax where everything is solved and everything is on the line.
So... anyways. I think that's part of the plot and excitment...
I'll have to check on HOlmes and being Thrillery though.
Comments would be greatly appreciated...
Thanks.
Sherlock Holmes would be nothing without his ingenious plot. Why? Because if what he solved were just ordinary random murders/or burglaries - there'd be no fun in it becuase one, it is ordinary (SO it won't grab our attention) and two ordinary and solved a gazillion times already murders don't showcase the intelligence and ability of our genius mastermind.
So, the plot is always essential. So, for the aforementioned reasons, it must be "different", "weird", and well, original. Weird, in particular, because it makes it difficult for ordinary people like the police at Scotland Yard, but easier for someone like Holmes because it holds an indication towards something else/can lead him to the right trail.
But anyways....
back to the plot. The Italian Secretary had quite a longer amount of time to develop the characters and introduce the plot - since it was well, a novel with over 300 pages. The Holmes stories are much less, probalby less than half or even 1/3 of the size sometimes-yet they still achieve the same appeal, ingeniouity and etc.
Ok... to start again.
The plot involves the murder of two people under the employment of the Queen to renovate the castle. It's strange because there is seemingly no logical answer to what the motive is.... and because there is a fear of ghosts. There's some info on the murder of a secretary and ect. that they believe haunt the castle where the two people were killed.
But anyways, part of the "weird" was the fact that every bone in the body was broken, yet no blood had flown out?? Something like that.. Essentially it was strange that every bone was broken. And there was great confusion on how it was humanly possible.
Then they uncover a motive and find someone that tells them a lot of info... Then we're still lost but Holmes gets it. And then he arranges stuff and we're off to find/meet the killer. That done, we have the final showdown (Which i think is actually more of a Celeb Carr thing then Doyle... tell me what you think from what you know about it).... where there's big risk of people dying - and actually some people do die, just not the important ones.... and other's are at teh risk of dying ... etc. etc.
But, of course, admiss the fighting and all they continue alive, and end up winning and the villains captured/thier plot foiled.
Part of the thriller aspect (which I'm not sure if its included in Holme's stories...or at least to the extent of Carr)... is the risk of thier lives all the time and the final climax where everything is solved and everything is on the line.
So... anyways. I think that's part of the plot and excitment...
I'll have to check on HOlmes and being Thrillery though.
Comments would be greatly appreciated...
Thanks.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
P.S. on a Study in Scarlet
I said early that "A Study in Scarlet" was one of the few novels where there wasn't enough information for the readers to figure out the villains and ect. ahead of time... I feel a little along the same lines with the Italian Secretary - but that might have been my lack of understanding of the plot and etc.... I felt it just jumped from one thing to another....
But... I wonder now why Doyle changed everything. We'll... In a Study in Scarlet, by leaving us all out of the picture including especially the police... we are further amazed by his deducing abiltiy.. Not only is he able to provide a name and a motivation and unfoil everything, he captures the actual person. Pretty amazing if you ask me.. while everyone else is still confused about this part of the investigation or get a false lead and false person... Holmes has it all figured out in his head and is already in the process of capturing the person... and well ahead of the police even starting to follow thier false lead...
So that's, like what I said earlier... the reason for him leaving us out of the loop always... Not to the extreme of his first short story though -since that probably would have gotten annoying.... For the reader to not knwo enough or even know the name of the villain adn then have him captured.
Just a thought.
But... I wonder now why Doyle changed everything. We'll... In a Study in Scarlet, by leaving us all out of the picture including especially the police... we are further amazed by his deducing abiltiy.. Not only is he able to provide a name and a motivation and unfoil everything, he captures the actual person. Pretty amazing if you ask me.. while everyone else is still confused about this part of the investigation or get a false lead and false person... Holmes has it all figured out in his head and is already in the process of capturing the person... and well ahead of the police even starting to follow thier false lead...
So that's, like what I said earlier... the reason for him leaving us out of the loop always... Not to the extreme of his first short story though -since that probably would have gotten annoying.... For the reader to not knwo enough or even know the name of the villain adn then have him captured.
Just a thought.
Next Book.... The Italian Secretary.
This book, by Celeb Carr, is essentially a "Sherlock Holmes" Tale. Holmes and Watson are the main characters, and it takes place in the same time period... So... it's like an original Sherlock HOlmes story - he even attempts to mimic the similar style and etc...Apparently... only a few of the words used by Watson (who narrates the story) is changed "in teh interest of accommodating modern readers, the anachronistic spelling soof several words" have been updated.
But... This book like the rest of Holmes' stories start in his apartment... with a note to start it off.
In the beginning his brother sends an encrypted message ... along the lines of "Youse done a special one, at No. 8 Pall mall - 'The sun burns too thoot, the sky fills with familar eagles' - read mcKay and Sinclair, collected works...Have your palm read for protection.... my old crofter will pull alongside at Quarantine" - It makes almost no sense at all... But Holmes understands it immediately... and lets Watson figure it out on his own - with some help of course... but still Watson has to use his own reasoning skills - I'm guessing to partially explain it to the reader that don't understand... not only because it is encrypted but becuase we are out of context in understanding it, too.
---There seems to be a lot of that in these stories.. Holmes understanding and knowing more... like him understanding "scotish nationalists" who attack HOlmes and Watson on their way to the castle are simply "better than averaage impostors" and not actual scottish nationalists - which we find out at the end of the book that they are imposters.
He understands more and can deduce more but we, even the more intelligent of us are left out of the loop. If not because Holmes is more logical and deducing capable person, it is because we are not at the scene of the crime and cannot figure it out for ourselves, -since everythign is filtered through Watson.
----but as to why Doyle does that and Carr mimics it? It's evident in a lot of HOlmes stories and even in other detective/thrillers that follow it. What do you think?
My reasoning is partially... that it's like a teaser.... keeps us interested but out of teh loop for a more dramatic ending? And we accept it becuase why? We'll we accept he's right and is proably correct in his assumptions because well as Watson himself says... He's right so often that its almost impossible to think of him as being wrong.
Also, it might be part of what builds his character.... Confidence in what he knows is correct but he's only willing to give out so much information about it.
So.... there's some food for thought.
Next order of business....
I found a piece of evidence for the police thing. ... ok not exactly following it... but it does provide some historical background to the entire thing.
"This is nether a matter for the local authorities nor one for Scotland Yard," Replied Mycroft. You yourself know how unsafe truly sensitive information can be, in their hands." ---This shows thies lack of faith in the ability and value of the police force - As does the reference to the police in "A Study in Scarlet" and in books like the Alienist. And... also the Dante Club... - Everyones a bit unforgiving on them!... Anyways...
That's it for now....
Probably More on the Italian secretary later.
But... This book like the rest of Holmes' stories start in his apartment... with a note to start it off.
In the beginning his brother sends an encrypted message ... along the lines of "Youse done a special one, at No. 8 Pall mall - 'The sun burns too thoot, the sky fills with familar eagles' - read mcKay and Sinclair, collected works...Have your palm read for protection.... my old crofter will pull alongside at Quarantine" - It makes almost no sense at all... But Holmes understands it immediately... and lets Watson figure it out on his own - with some help of course... but still Watson has to use his own reasoning skills - I'm guessing to partially explain it to the reader that don't understand... not only because it is encrypted but becuase we are out of context in understanding it, too.
---There seems to be a lot of that in these stories.. Holmes understanding and knowing more... like him understanding "scotish nationalists" who attack HOlmes and Watson on their way to the castle are simply "better than averaage impostors" and not actual scottish nationalists - which we find out at the end of the book that they are imposters.
He understands more and can deduce more but we, even the more intelligent of us are left out of the loop. If not because Holmes is more logical and deducing capable person, it is because we are not at the scene of the crime and cannot figure it out for ourselves, -since everythign is filtered through Watson.
----but as to why Doyle does that and Carr mimics it? It's evident in a lot of HOlmes stories and even in other detective/thrillers that follow it. What do you think?
My reasoning is partially... that it's like a teaser.... keeps us interested but out of teh loop for a more dramatic ending? And we accept it becuase why? We'll we accept he's right and is proably correct in his assumptions because well as Watson himself says... He's right so often that its almost impossible to think of him as being wrong.
Also, it might be part of what builds his character.... Confidence in what he knows is correct but he's only willing to give out so much information about it.
So.... there's some food for thought.
Next order of business....
I found a piece of evidence for the police thing. ... ok not exactly following it... but it does provide some historical background to the entire thing.
"This is nether a matter for the local authorities nor one for Scotland Yard," Replied Mycroft. You yourself know how unsafe truly sensitive information can be, in their hands." ---This shows thies lack of faith in the ability and value of the police force - As does the reference to the police in "A Study in Scarlet" and in books like the Alienist. And... also the Dante Club... - Everyones a bit unforgiving on them!... Anyways...
That's it for now....
Probably More on the Italian secretary later.
Friday, November 23, 2007
A study in Scarlet
So... back to it again.
While I was looking up Sherlock Holmes... I found out that a study in scarlet was different from all the other sherlock holmes/detective stories because you weren't actually able to figure out who the villain was at all... The name Jefferson Hope(I think that was it) isn't revealed to you until Sherlock figures it out.
(I didn't notice this myself because, normally, I don't figure out who the villain is/what happened until the end... kind of like Watson .... but even more clueless) The only one I can figure it out for are the Dan Brown novels... cuz the plot gets a little predictable.. but anyways....
I'm not sure if I said this earlier.. but I think part of the allure of Holmes is his intelligence and capabilities.
But, besides the character himself, which is very important on its own.... there is also the reoccuring idea of the sidekick character, the impossible/creative plot, the danger, and maybe police involvement too? In every mystery novel I've read (casi todos...) there's always a reference to the Harvard Yard, or the FBI blah blah... you get the picture.... Though, that probably has more to do with it being a crime and crimes needing crminal prosecutors... But in a lot of books including the Alienest, the Dante Club, and the Sherlock Holmes novles, the police (some of them) are helpful to the protagonists.... while others... are not so friendly. ---But truthfully I don't think they are as important... but yet again maybe they are... you tell me.
What I think the police element brings in is... 1.when they have a collaborator, they are on the same side as the "good people" and not the villains/and don't act as as a conspirator. But, at the same time, when they are against the rest of the "ignorant" - whether of racial acceptance or new sciences - we're ok with the protagonists making fun of them/working against them becuase we know they (the bad police people) are in the wrong... So., wrong against wrong is ok... not really but you get the picture.
According to the book I was reading, in teh picture, watson looked like/was portrayed as a dog..... meanign he possessed those characterisitcs. Loyalty, slight intelligence, obedience.... stuff like that... -and in other books.... sidekick characters have similarish characteristics. I wonder whether this has a reason on its own (the reason why Doyle used Watson) or because later people wanted to mimick Doyle's use of Watson to recreate teh success of the Holmes detective stories..
Anyways... All detective stories seem to have creative/intelligent plots. -But that makes sense, since if they are all similar/based on the same crime-it would get boring fast. And, it's good for Sherlock HOlmes, becuase he said quirks/strange things/out of place things make things easier. - cuz it's more specific and such... (makes sense to some degree. but that's only if you can make a good enough guess at figuring it out... so not so much sense is made i guess).
But ... also, I feel Holmes and his fellow successors make too many assumptions when making their guesses ( I'll find esamples later...)
Ok... that's it for now...
But just to sum a study in scarlet (I knwo i was more general in this post....but) it was the first one. Watson is set up as a sidekick... There was a crazy plot... not really understandable... We're still left out of the picture (but along with Watson too - probably another purpose of having him there. He's intelligent and learned, but even he who also witnesses the same thigns as HOlme can't figure it out... so we don't feel like idiots for not knowing ourselves.s
La dee da...
If anyone would like to answer my questions... It'd be GREATLY appreciated.
While I was looking up Sherlock Holmes... I found out that a study in scarlet was different from all the other sherlock holmes/detective stories because you weren't actually able to figure out who the villain was at all... The name Jefferson Hope(I think that was it) isn't revealed to you until Sherlock figures it out.
(I didn't notice this myself because, normally, I don't figure out who the villain is/what happened until the end... kind of like Watson .... but even more clueless) The only one I can figure it out for are the Dan Brown novels... cuz the plot gets a little predictable.. but anyways....
I'm not sure if I said this earlier.. but I think part of the allure of Holmes is his intelligence and capabilities.
But, besides the character himself, which is very important on its own.... there is also the reoccuring idea of the sidekick character, the impossible/creative plot, the danger, and maybe police involvement too? In every mystery novel I've read (casi todos...) there's always a reference to the Harvard Yard, or the FBI blah blah... you get the picture.... Though, that probably has more to do with it being a crime and crimes needing crminal prosecutors... But in a lot of books including the Alienest, the Dante Club, and the Sherlock Holmes novles, the police (some of them) are helpful to the protagonists.... while others... are not so friendly. ---But truthfully I don't think they are as important... but yet again maybe they are... you tell me.
What I think the police element brings in is... 1.when they have a collaborator, they are on the same side as the "good people" and not the villains/and don't act as as a conspirator. But, at the same time, when they are against the rest of the "ignorant" - whether of racial acceptance or new sciences - we're ok with the protagonists making fun of them/working against them becuase we know they (the bad police people) are in the wrong... So., wrong against wrong is ok... not really but you get the picture.
According to the book I was reading, in teh picture, watson looked like/was portrayed as a dog..... meanign he possessed those characterisitcs. Loyalty, slight intelligence, obedience.... stuff like that... -and in other books.... sidekick characters have similarish characteristics. I wonder whether this has a reason on its own (the reason why Doyle used Watson) or because later people wanted to mimick Doyle's use of Watson to recreate teh success of the Holmes detective stories..
Anyways... All detective stories seem to have creative/intelligent plots. -But that makes sense, since if they are all similar/based on the same crime-it would get boring fast. And, it's good for Sherlock HOlmes, becuase he said quirks/strange things/out of place things make things easier. - cuz it's more specific and such... (makes sense to some degree. but that's only if you can make a good enough guess at figuring it out... so not so much sense is made i guess).
But ... also, I feel Holmes and his fellow successors make too many assumptions when making their guesses ( I'll find esamples later...)
Ok... that's it for now...
But just to sum a study in scarlet (I knwo i was more general in this post....but) it was the first one. Watson is set up as a sidekick... There was a crazy plot... not really understandable... We're still left out of the picture (but along with Watson too - probably another purpose of having him there. He's intelligent and learned, but even he who also witnesses the same thigns as HOlme can't figure it out... so we don't feel like idiots for not knowing ourselves.s
La dee da...
If anyone would like to answer my questions... It'd be GREATLY appreciated.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
A Study in Scarlet
I know a lot of other people have already read this one/will read this one....
But just in case, it is the first short story written by Doyle that has Sherlock Holmes as a character.
So.... what can I say about it. Well, I wouldn't say its typical... ok maybe I will.
Here's the gist of it... Big, Strange and Twisted murder happens. Nobody understands it... really confusing. Not the police, nada.
Then Sherlock does his investigation... seemingly random and crazy.
Then He does crazy stuff and explains some, only some and not all of what he knows... So we see what others (like the police) have missed out on ... but we still don't understand it completely.... kinda like a tease i guess.
Then voila, the person is captured. And were still confused.... Then big explaination/reasoning and we're all like... Woah... so obvious!!! why did i think of that?
The hero always stays the same and with the same qualities, and he always, except for once, wins... so how can we possibly love these stories, time after time. Generation after generation??!!
Let's analyze the character of Sherlock Holmes himself, first... If you guys know anything else about him that I don't (which is a lot) feel free to tell me.
He's a student/adult though, and understands a lot about Chemistry, reaonsing, logic and etc. /analysis
Highly intelligent, but slightly conceited at the same time....-not conceited as arrongant though... just extremely confident in his ability, and occasionally the lack of it in others. It must be the fact that he always gets it right... he's never been wrong yet... - but is that really possible?!!! for a real person... yet again he isn't real.
Anyways, his observation/logic skills, which most will connect ot his intelligence, is much higher than ours. Truthfully though, how many people can guess like he did that Dr. Watson had just come from a war. Here's what he said "i knew you came from Afganistan (where the war was) [because] here is a gentleman of a medical type, but with the air of a military man. clearly an army doctor, then. He has just come from teh tropics, for his face is dark, and that is not the natural tint of his skin, for his wrists are fair. He has undergone hardship and sickness, as his haggard face says clearly. His left arm has been injured. He holds it in a stiff an dunnatural manner. Hwere in the tropics could an English army doctor have seen much hardship and got his arm wounded? Clearly in afghanistan.' the whole train of thought did not occupy a second."
Rediciolous right? How could he figure ALL that out, and so soon? Oh the reasoning skills involved. Yet, as soon as i read that.... i was like... hmm... well his dad could have been in the military, maybe that's why... or how do you know he was of the "medical type"? Or... maybe he just went for a vacation... or what if he wasn't affected too much by the war.....-I know, weak questions but still... there is a possibility for error, yet not once (or maybe there has been a few, but for the majority not often) is there an error in his judgement.
---Is this what attracts us? The fact that he is almost perfect in the areas of his expertise?!!!!!
What do you guys think? Opinions would be GREATLY appreciated.
I'll talk a bit more 'bout Scarlet letter next time i think..... it was interesting and actually, though i said pretty typical.... there was one part that was confusing/different.
--Winnie
But just in case, it is the first short story written by Doyle that has Sherlock Holmes as a character.
So.... what can I say about it. Well, I wouldn't say its typical... ok maybe I will.
Here's the gist of it... Big, Strange and Twisted murder happens. Nobody understands it... really confusing. Not the police, nada.
Then Sherlock does his investigation... seemingly random and crazy.
Then He does crazy stuff and explains some, only some and not all of what he knows... So we see what others (like the police) have missed out on ... but we still don't understand it completely.... kinda like a tease i guess.
Then voila, the person is captured. And were still confused.... Then big explaination/reasoning and we're all like... Woah... so obvious!!! why did i think of that?
The hero always stays the same and with the same qualities, and he always, except for once, wins... so how can we possibly love these stories, time after time. Generation after generation??!!
Let's analyze the character of Sherlock Holmes himself, first... If you guys know anything else about him that I don't (which is a lot) feel free to tell me.
He's a student/adult though, and understands a lot about Chemistry, reaonsing, logic and etc. /analysis
Highly intelligent, but slightly conceited at the same time....-not conceited as arrongant though... just extremely confident in his ability, and occasionally the lack of it in others. It must be the fact that he always gets it right... he's never been wrong yet... - but is that really possible?!!! for a real person... yet again he isn't real.
Anyways, his observation/logic skills, which most will connect ot his intelligence, is much higher than ours. Truthfully though, how many people can guess like he did that Dr. Watson had just come from a war. Here's what he said "i knew you came from Afganistan (where the war was) [because] here is a gentleman of a medical type, but with the air of a military man. clearly an army doctor, then. He has just come from teh tropics, for his face is dark, and that is not the natural tint of his skin, for his wrists are fair. He has undergone hardship and sickness, as his haggard face says clearly. His left arm has been injured. He holds it in a stiff an dunnatural manner. Hwere in the tropics could an English army doctor have seen much hardship and got his arm wounded? Clearly in afghanistan.' the whole train of thought did not occupy a second."
Rediciolous right? How could he figure ALL that out, and so soon? Oh the reasoning skills involved. Yet, as soon as i read that.... i was like... hmm... well his dad could have been in the military, maybe that's why... or how do you know he was of the "medical type"? Or... maybe he just went for a vacation... or what if he wasn't affected too much by the war.....-I know, weak questions but still... there is a possibility for error, yet not once (or maybe there has been a few, but for the majority not often) is there an error in his judgement.
---Is this what attracts us? The fact that he is almost perfect in the areas of his expertise?!!!!!
What do you guys think? Opinions would be GREATLY appreciated.
I'll talk a bit more 'bout Scarlet letter next time i think..... it was interesting and actually, though i said pretty typical.... there was one part that was confusing/different.
--Winnie
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Ok...reworking...
I decided that I should probably read some of the Sherlock Holmes stories first, which i don't know too much of, before starting to compare the two....
So.. I decided to start with A Study in Scarlet, the first story by Doyle to feature Sherlock Holmes....
So far, it's like an introductory chapter, where you meet the characters - since this is the first time ever Holmes has been cited, there's a physical description ontop of the amazing detective skills and ect.
He has a tad bit of conceit about him, too...
Anyways... I'll read a little more before I blog again...
Maybe I'll do a little more Dante blogging, too - I read it straight-through because it was interesting.... and didn't really look for the elements I needed.... whoops...
Toodles!
Winnie
So.. I decided to start with A Study in Scarlet, the first story by Doyle to feature Sherlock Holmes....
So far, it's like an introductory chapter, where you meet the characters - since this is the first time ever Holmes has been cited, there's a physical description ontop of the amazing detective skills and ect.
He has a tad bit of conceit about him, too...
Anyways... I'll read a little more before I blog again...
Maybe I'll do a little more Dante blogging, too - I read it straight-through because it was interesting.... and didn't really look for the elements I needed.... whoops...
Toodles!
Winnie
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
The Appeal.
So... part of my question was what exactly makes storys and thrillers like this appeal to generation after generation.
And, one possible idea/solution I think is the ingenious murder plots. Another factor might be that these ingenious plots reflect an intelligence and ingeniouity on the part of the murderer. This is unsettling because it presents the possibility that the enemy might win over our heros.
In the Dante Club, people were murdered according to the punishments in the different level of Dante's Inferno. According to the professors, who are the intelligent members of the Dante Club, the murders were perfectly executed and planned with great detail... as if by a Dante Scholar. And though they recognize this factor, they cannot go to the police with it because, during this time period, Dante was unfamiliar to Americans, and the Dante club was the first American group to work on the translation.
The Plot was interesting because, like the Alieniest by Celeb Carr, murders continued throughout the story - and each led to further investigation and evidence. However, this also creates an atmosphere of danger and fear for the heros of the story, because we fear they might be next on the list.
Another factor that I've noticed was similar to the Alieniest and the Angel of Darkness (Two Historical Thrillers), is that the crimes are brutal, gruesome, and unimaginable because of the severe mutiliations or the cruelty of the murder. In this story in particular, the murders were horrendous because the murderer didn't just kill but tortured them. For example, one person was bludgeoned to the head (but that didn't kill him), it was the maggots that were planted in his head wound that slowly ate him alive for three days that killed him.
--Ok ... that's it for now. I know it was un poco long but bear with me.
Also... I'd appreciate some feedback.... whoever has me. Muchas Gracias.
And, one possible idea/solution I think is the ingenious murder plots. Another factor might be that these ingenious plots reflect an intelligence and ingeniouity on the part of the murderer. This is unsettling because it presents the possibility that the enemy might win over our heros.
In the Dante Club, people were murdered according to the punishments in the different level of Dante's Inferno. According to the professors, who are the intelligent members of the Dante Club, the murders were perfectly executed and planned with great detail... as if by a Dante Scholar. And though they recognize this factor, they cannot go to the police with it because, during this time period, Dante was unfamiliar to Americans, and the Dante club was the first American group to work on the translation.
The Plot was interesting because, like the Alieniest by Celeb Carr, murders continued throughout the story - and each led to further investigation and evidence. However, this also creates an atmosphere of danger and fear for the heros of the story, because we fear they might be next on the list.
Another factor that I've noticed was similar to the Alieniest and the Angel of Darkness (Two Historical Thrillers), is that the crimes are brutal, gruesome, and unimaginable because of the severe mutiliations or the cruelty of the murder. In this story in particular, the murders were horrendous because the murderer didn't just kill but tortured them. For example, one person was bludgeoned to the head (but that didn't kill him), it was the maggots that were planted in his head wound that slowly ate him alive for three days that killed him.
--Ok ... that's it for now. I know it was un poco long but bear with me.
Also... I'd appreciate some feedback.... whoever has me. Muchas Gracias.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
The History in a Historical Thriller.
Another "essential question" I was debating on before choosing the Sherlock one was what do Historical Backgrounds add to books. And, as you can tell from my blogging title, I am reading all Historical Thrillers.
I was interested and just wanted to talk about it a little.
Well, for one, it adds a very detailed and set(as in realistic and almost unchanging) background, because these times periods have happened, and events like the civil war, the racism, the corruption in the government, and etc. are true reflections of the time period.
"Barnicoat did not possess knowledge enough to admit this. The coroner was a political appointee, and the position required no special medical or scientific expertise, only a tolerance for dead bodies". The historical settings and details throughout the novel, on top of the plot, not only help to provide more concrete details for the story, but also help to create a clearer image in our minds of the historical happenings/mindsets/ideas floating around during the time periods, which for this book (the Dante Club) is post-civil war/post-reconstruction.
From following the story of Nicolas Rey, the first African-American police officer. As a war hero and excellent solider, he was given the chance, by the mayor to be a police officer. However, as one, he is abused/disrespected by fellow officers and detectives. The officers themselves acutally signed a petition calling for his resignation. Also, many restrictions were placed on him-such as not being allowed to wear a uniform, carrya gun, or arrest a white person without another police officer being present. And to my surprize, other African - Americans feared/rioted the most against him.
I particularly like reading Historical Thrillers because, for one the mystery and plot itself is intriguing and absorbing. Besides that though, being able to relate, especially last year after APUSH, the history/time period I've learnt in school to what is presented in the story is particularly interesting - like recognized the racism or the corruption within the government.
I was interested and just wanted to talk about it a little.
Well, for one, it adds a very detailed and set(as in realistic and almost unchanging) background, because these times periods have happened, and events like the civil war, the racism, the corruption in the government, and etc. are true reflections of the time period.
"Barnicoat did not possess knowledge enough to admit this. The coroner was a political appointee, and the position required no special medical or scientific expertise, only a tolerance for dead bodies". The historical settings and details throughout the novel, on top of the plot, not only help to provide more concrete details for the story, but also help to create a clearer image in our minds of the historical happenings/mindsets/ideas floating around during the time periods, which for this book (the Dante Club) is post-civil war/post-reconstruction.
From following the story of Nicolas Rey, the first African-American police officer. As a war hero and excellent solider, he was given the chance, by the mayor to be a police officer. However, as one, he is abused/disrespected by fellow officers and detectives. The officers themselves acutally signed a petition calling for his resignation. Also, many restrictions were placed on him-such as not being allowed to wear a uniform, carrya gun, or arrest a white person without another police officer being present. And to my surprize, other African - Americans feared/rioted the most against him.
I particularly like reading Historical Thrillers because, for one the mystery and plot itself is intriguing and absorbing. Besides that though, being able to relate, especially last year after APUSH, the history/time period I've learnt in school to what is presented in the story is particularly interesting - like recognized the racism or the corruption within the government.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
The Dante Club
So... might as well begin.
As I've been reading through, I've noticed that there isn't just one "Sherlock Holmes" genius. Longfellow, Holmes, Lowell, Fields, and Rey, too share in the crime solving. But, they are all highly intelligent and accomplished. Longfellow, Holmes and Lowell being literary geniuses and well-respected poets throughout Boston. Fields is a successful and talented publisher while Rey is the first mulatto (the word they used in the book) police officer in Boston, a war hero, with keen intuition and abilitiy too.
It's a collection of intelligent people, all who make their own contributions, similiar in a way to the alieniest/angel of darkness cast. The most respected peer in this group is Longfellow having an elevated status in a way similar to that of Kreizler in the Alienest.
However, these characters, though heros are not without their own faults. Oliver Wendell Holmes wallows in his own self-importance and vanity at times... (which i found ironic since he is the person whom the library at Andover is dedicated to..)
Just some beginning comments... I'll be back later...
Toodles for now.
As I've been reading through, I've noticed that there isn't just one "Sherlock Holmes" genius. Longfellow, Holmes, Lowell, Fields, and Rey, too share in the crime solving. But, they are all highly intelligent and accomplished. Longfellow, Holmes and Lowell being literary geniuses and well-respected poets throughout Boston. Fields is a successful and talented publisher while Rey is the first mulatto (the word they used in the book) police officer in Boston, a war hero, with keen intuition and abilitiy too.
It's a collection of intelligent people, all who make their own contributions, similiar in a way to the alieniest/angel of darkness cast. The most respected peer in this group is Longfellow having an elevated status in a way similar to that of Kreizler in the Alienest.
However, these characters, though heros are not without their own faults. Oliver Wendell Holmes wallows in his own self-importance and vanity at times... (which i found ironic since he is the person whom the library at Andover is dedicated to..)
Just some beginning comments... I'll be back later...
Toodles for now.
So... Let's Begin
Ok. I thought I'd begin by introducing what my question is... Yes, it's about Historical Thrillers... and the books I'll be reading are the Dante Club, the Italian Secretary (By Celeb Carr), some Sherlock Holmes stories, the list of seven by Mark Frost and the Rule of Four.
My question that I'll be writing on is...
Detective stories and the likes of Sherlock Homes, of the highly intelligent and learned expert solving crimes (i.e. the Da Vinci Code and the Alienist) are oft-used and well-loved sotries that have stayed with us throughout the years, ever since the first Sherlock Holmes in 1887. What is it that draws readers to these stories and why are they still loved and interesting to read to this day? Is it the character itslef? The ingenious plots?
I'm not sure whose supposed to be reading my blog... if I knew before, I forgot now.. But hope you have fun! And comment often.
I'll try to update regularly, though I know I've been procrastinating so far... I finished a book but just haven't blogged yet.. whoops..
-Winnie
My question that I'll be writing on is...
Detective stories and the likes of Sherlock Homes, of the highly intelligent and learned expert solving crimes (i.e. the Da Vinci Code and the Alienist) are oft-used and well-loved sotries that have stayed with us throughout the years, ever since the first Sherlock Holmes in 1887. What is it that draws readers to these stories and why are they still loved and interesting to read to this day? Is it the character itslef? The ingenious plots?
I'm not sure whose supposed to be reading my blog... if I knew before, I forgot now.. But hope you have fun! And comment often.
I'll try to update regularly, though I know I've been procrastinating so far... I finished a book but just haven't blogged yet.. whoops..
-Winnie
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)