Baker Street Irregulars discussion

I would like to know what the opinions of this topic are from my fellow Irregulars. First of all I will not lie and admit that I'm a real life Sherlock snob lol. I find it hard to read a story about Sherlock Holmes that was not written by Conan Doyle. Yes I know how snobby that makes me sound. Anyhow. I dont know if this topic has been covered before. Anthony Horowitz is getting ready to publish a new Sherlock story that has been allowed by the Conan Doyle Estate. I cannot decide if I'm going to read it or not me being what some call a "purest" :\ My question is...what makes this new story so much better than other ones that have already been published? The Doyle Estate only owns the rights to The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes. All the other books are part of the public domain. So you think that they are trying to cash in now on the fame of the movies? And if they are does that some how diminish the fact that a new story is coming out? And am I being a butt for not reading anything thats not been written by Conan Doyle? I have a feeling the answer to that will be yes ;)

Jackson you are not a snob. Normally I would agree with you that no one can write Holmes better than Conan Doyle did.

But this is different becasue I absolutly love Anthony Horowitz. I have read almost everything he's written so yes I will be reading his new Holmes novel, unfortunatly I don't think it comes out until November.

I strongly encourage everyone to read his Alex Rider novels. Yes they are for young adults they are the best of his work, though anyone who is really into Harry Potter might like his Goosingham Grange novels better.

Jackson wrote: "So you think that they are trying to cash in now on the fame of the movies? And if they are does that some how diminish the fact that a new story is coming out? And am I being a butt for not reading anything thats not been written by Conan Doyle? I have a feeling the answer to that will be yes ;)"

Haha, I don't think you are being a butt for not reading anything that's not written by Doyle. I don't think fan fiction is everyone's cup of tea, especially with source material with such a great and distinctive voice.

When I first found out about the conan doyle estate approved book I was like, "pfft whatever." What matters is if it's good. I haven't read any Anthony Horowitz stuff but his books are very popular with the kids at the library.

I work part time in a bookshop along with my full time job and ive seen a lot of the Alex Rider books go out. And like you Joanna ive never read anything by him but ive heard that hes a good writer. But thank you ladies for defending me against my own criticism ;) perhaps im not as snobbish as i thought i was.

i think one main reason that im so partial to doyle than other writers is not really just because they are his characters. but mainly because he wrote them in the time period in which they happened. so to me its like looking back in time through a window of which the writer has first hand knowledge of. i think thats why i enjoy classic literature so much anyhow. im reading by a first hand account of what life was like in whatever time period im reading. so when i read fan fiction i know that the writer is to an extent guessing at what it was like. sigh. am i making any sense haha.

Yes you are making a lot of sense. I think a lot of the modern writers think that if they just use the words "Hansom Cab" and "Gaslamp" enough times then they can write a Victorian time centered story. This is not so. I've noticed the same thing applies to stories by H.G. Wells and Jules Verne. It is the "writing of the time you're in" effect that gives their work that "True story" feeling. Makes you want to believe that some time in the past Sherlock Holmes was hunting ghostly hounds on the moor while Martians were invading London.

I found this NYT story of it's "officialness" very interesting. Looks like we are not the only ones skeptical.

"The Shakespeare Estate" God forrbid. Thanks for sharing that was most interesting.

Jackson, do you read other books written in the same time period? I just recently got into Oscar Wilde because I got interested in the late victorian period. I also bought a collection of Raffles stories. Is there anything that you are interested? Maybe I can make it a monthly read!

Jackson wrote: "I would like to know what the opinions of this topic are from my fellow Irregulars. First of all I will not lie and admit that I'm a real life Sherlock snob lol. I find it hard to read a story abou..."

The administrator for the Doyle estate is not just in charge of the Casebook but of the Holmes character (and the supporting characters, Mycroft, Watson, Moriarty, etc). Outside of the US there is less of a domain issue, but if you want to publish a Holmes novel in the US, you have to go through the estate or risk the consequences.
I have written both Sherlockian pastiches (published in Canada) and Jane Austen adaptations, and the communities are pretty much the same. There are the purists who think that what the original author wrote is all that should be written, and that any additional material should be confined to essays, scholarly works, etc. Then there are the devotees who think that it's okay to adapt, as long as you keep to the tone, the perimeter and prose style set down by the original author. And then there are the fans - a lot of them have not even read the original works (I know in the Austen community, the enthusiasm started with the 1995 Pride and Prejudice film) - for them, anything goes. Time travel, space travel, zombies and all sorts of whatnot. I can't deny that this tends to be the most vocal and enthusiastic audience, but I tend to fall into the middle group.

I read Anthony Horowitz's Sherlock Holmes: A House of Silk novel a couple of weeks ago, and I have to admit - I didn't enjoy it. For me, it didn't capture their personalities correctly and the way they were portrayed just didn't seem right. The plot relied mostly on action, and Holmes had very few deductions. It was extremely dull and the only thing that kept me reading was the fact that it was Sherlock Holmes.
As great as an author Anthony Horowitz may be, I don't think he was destined to write a Sherlock Holmes novel.

Monica wrote: "I read Anthony Horowitz's Sherlock Holmes: A House of Silk novel a couple of weeks ago, and I have to admit - I didn't enjoy it. For me, it didn't capture their personalities correctly and the way ..."

ha, that is interesting! I enjoyed it because I liked the action. I do agree that the mystery was a bit lacking though. it seemed like a reader could figure everything pretty much immediately.

I will defend Horowitz's novel for a bit here, I loved it, and I feel that he very much captured not only the characters voice but the writing style as well. At times I felt like I was reading a Doyle novel and Watson was sitting across from me relaying his tale. Now that being said I did feel, a times, that the plot seemed to drag here and there. I also didn’t have an issue with a majority of the plot points being something I deduced early because even Doyle had clues that the reader could pick up on. I have figured out the ending of a lot of Doyle's Sherlock stories because he lets you and I feel Horowitz did the same.

I did go into this with an open mind and excitement that the Doyle estate deemed it worthy to be something included in the line of novels in the Cannon. Because anyone can write a story with Sherlock Holmes and that is it. But there are few who can write one and have the family endorse it. I did feel like I was over critical of it at first but in the end my enjoyment of it only grew.