For a debut novel, this book was OK. Yes, I said OK as I had a love hate relationship with this book from the very first chapter.

For anyone to take on writing about the characters of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson takes guts, but if it is pulled off well as in the case of the [b:The House of Silk: A Sherlock Holmes Novel|11093329|The House of Silk A Sherlock Holmes Novel|Anthony Horowitz|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1327877129s/11093329.jpg|16015218] it can be a glorious thing, that was not the case here. Despite a valiant effort, this Author was unable to capture all the character nuances that combine to make the detective readers of other Holmes missives have come to know and expect. By writing the book from the perspective of Dr. Watson a lot of the internal debates and musings Holmes has with himself are lost along with a lot of his eccentric qualities. In this book Holmes comes across as an arrogant, pretentious ass that has no lovable qualities to his name at all. Unfortunately, Dr. Watson does not come out of this novel unscathed; as a character I’ve always seen as being the stable and steadying force behind Holmes, here he is depicted as bumbling fool who would be well pressed to dress himself in the morning. The portrayal of Jack the Ripper was also flimsy, and would have benefitted greatly with a lot more fleshing out and back story.

The novel is extremely dry, the language at times definitely at odds with the era in which it is set. The Author does a good job of portraying Whitechapel at the time of the murders but apart from that there was very little to keep me interested, and this was definitely not the page turner that had been promised. For me there was not enough tension, and the discovery of who the Ripper was became obvious about partway through the book; surely not a mystery worthy of calling in Holmes to solve.

If you like Sherlock Holmes, you may enjoy this book; as for me I don’t think I will be reading anymore by this Author despite their valiant attempts to recreate the works of Arthur Conan Doyle.



Originally reviewed on: http://catesbooknuthut.com/2015/02/09/review-dust-and-shadow-an-account-of-the-r...





This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
( )

A good read, but it seemed a distinctly American production of Holmesian adventures - Mycroft is overtly motherly and the cheeky repartee (a competition of arrogance, more like) between the brothers is gone. Holmes is made much more humane, which is a great departure from the canon, although I don't hold it against the author. It seemed a little weird that Watson, after having paid his due penance in service, could've reacted so poorly to an explosion. The uniform bit was a dead giveaway though, so it lessened the tension in the supper-of-the-five.
All in all, I'd save this for a plane, because it's gripping, it's nailed the language and the writing style of the canon, and the concept of a true-crime novel set in the world of crime-fiction is a brilliant one. ( )

You would not know that this book wasn't written by Conan-Doyle! Great read ( )

Of all the Sherlock Holmes homages I've read, this does the best job of replicating the form and style of Conan Doyle. I like most updated, modernized, "new-spin-on" versions; I really liked The Seven-Per-Cent Solution. But when I've just reread some Conan Doyle and find myself wishing for just more of the same, some clever new take on Sherlock simply won't do. I can only hope that Lyndsay Faye comes up with a new Holmes mystery every few years to satisfy my craving for authentic Sherlock Holmes! ( )

As an avid Sherlock Holmes fan, I've found myself disappointed one too many times with modern SH novels. They all seem to lack that certain something, that ability to make you believe you've just time travelled back to late Victorian London, about to pay a visit to Baker Street. They may try, but they don't quite make it.

This isn't to say that these authors don't have talent as mystery writers, just that they don't seem to get it right when it comes to portraying the great detective. Something's missing. But when I took a gamble on Lyndsay Faye's "Dust and Shadow", I soon discovered I'd found it!

Reading her novel is so like reading a book by Doyle, it makes me wonder if she had a genuine ghost writer, perhaps Sir Arthur paid her a visit from the afterlife and they collaborated? She just gets it right, without a sense that she's putting effort into it, just flows naturally. Our old friend Dr. Watson is back, not as a pale imitation (which is all too often the case), but as Doyle meant him to be. Ms. Faye has captured - both in narrative and dialog - the style of Doyle with a lightness and ease, so you never feel she's trying too hard. She just naturally got it right.

Ms. Faye did plenty of research, as she went into detail about the cases and lives of the victims, and even linked a separate murder case, with very convincing evidence. Her solution to the Ripper killings was also very probable, one that I hadn't thought of before, but which now makes me wonder.

The novel starts with an earlier case of Holmes' being wrapped up, he solves the puzzle and then the new adventure begins. This gives a feeling of continuity, as if you were watching this on TV and getting the highlights last week's episode before this week's starts. I found that very effective in setting up the proper atmosphere.

This book would have made one terrific TV movie, back in the Jeremy Brett and David Burke days, my favorite Holmes/Watson team.

"Dust and Shadow" gets a well deserved five stars!

( )