While not to my benefit to read #5 before 2, 3 and 4, I didn't have the time at the library to sort thru the publication dates, so I went from the first Kate book to this one...from Lee being shot to aleady being up and walking and missed the having of the kiddo...but that;s ok........ I have read this series also, so will pick it up. Interestingly, this is the one where kate runs into the Holmes fanatic, who is murdered and a chunk of the book is a story that perhaps was written about holmes in San Fran. I am finding that I truly do enjoy the Mary Holmes series better, but still find it intriguing how the style of writing changes etc....tho there is a common knowledge base that runs thru. I keep wondering if the 2 series were run thru the porgrams that determine cadence and word usage etc to help determine authorship!Another partnership that is fun between she and partner Al Hawkin.......himself now in a relationship with a person he met in teh first book. It is also intriguing to me how that did not take away from teh story for me the way the intro of a romantic relationship in The Trophy Exchange did. Some, I think is that king is a better author and addresses relationships much more richly![close:] In this thrilling new crime novel that ingeniously bridges Laurie R. King's Edgar and Creasey Awards' winning Kate Martinelli series and her bestselling series starring Mary Russell, San Francisco homicide detective Kate Martinelli crosses paths with Sherlock Holmes in a spellbinding dual mystery that could come only from the intelligent, witty, and complex mind of New York Times bestselling author Laurie R. King.Kate Martinelli has seen her share of peculiar things as a San Francisco cop, but never anything quite like this: an ornate Victorian sitting room straight out of a Sherlock Holmes story complete with violin, tobacco-filled Persian slipper, and gunshots in the wallpaper that spell out the initials of the late queen. Philip Gilbert was a true Holmes fanatic, from his antiquated décor to his vintage wardrobe. And no mere fan of fiction's great detective, but a leading expert with a collection of priceless memorabilia; a collection some would kill for.And perhaps someone did: In his collection is a century-old manuscript purportedly written by Holmes himself; a manuscript that eerily echoes details of Gilbert's own murder.Now, with the help of her partner, Al Hawkin, Kate must follow the convoluted trail of a killer;one who may have trained at the feet of the greatest mind of all times. [close:]
So this is sort of a Holmes pastiche, sort of not. And before I go any further: it's not really any good, but the pastiche elements themselves are definitely worth checking out.It's set within King's non-Holmes series and essentially attempts to bring her Holmesian readers over with the promise of, well, basically a crossover. I've not read any of the prior material, though thankfully that didn't matter; as I understand it, there was a very long gap between this and the previous book, so we get a decent quantity of exposition.The main plot revolves around a supposedly 'new' Holmes manuscript written by Doyle. It's ridiculous. It makes no sense. At all. I don't understand how the hell we're supposed to buy that anyone would ever, ever believe the manuscript was from Doyle, especially since all the characters in the novel are enthusiastic Holmesians. For a start, it revolves around queer issues. Then there's the fact that it's written from Holmes' perspective, and not in the way Doyle attempted to write such a thing. But the interesting part then lies in the fact that we're given this manuscript to read.Because: guys! It's a Holmes pastiche that deals with queer issues! Trans* issues, in fact! (Er, which... the modern day characters refer to as 'gay', which seems... rather weird. And terrible. What does it say when the early 1900's style material seems almost more progressive than the 2000's style material in that regard..?) (I don't know, let's ask Moffat!) And it's got a good Holmes voice, and it's interesting, and it's really fucking obviously supposed to take place within the Mary Russell canon, which is interesting given the sheer level of 'Holmes might be less than 100% straight' stuff I picked up in it. HM.But then we have the rest of the novel. And it's all terrible cliches, and bland characters, and 'haha Holmesians are weeeeird!' dullness. Boring writing, too. About the only saving grace is the modern-day Holmes parallel, who I'd have liked to see more of, but unfortunately he's dead so there you go.Oh, and it has really trite pseudo-progressive stuff shoved in.So I wouldn't recommend this unless you're a Mary Russell fan who wants to see Holmes be kind of queer. (In other words, unless you're basically me.)
What do You think about The Art Of Detection (2006)?
I thought The Art of Detection was very patchy. The investigation of the murder of the Holmes fan is interesting, and I enjoyed that, but the insertion of the 100 page document purportedly written by Arthur Conan Doyle really seemed out of place. It wasn't necessary to include the entire document, and it didn't seem very much in the style of Arthur Conan Doyle, for all that Laurie King has clearly done her research (other readers who are fans of Sherlock Holmes may disagree, of course). The details are correct, but the attitude doesn't seem to match what I read of Doyle (who had rather appalling views of women and minorities). I also thought that the end felt rather tacked on. That is, the solving of the murder was alright (if not particularly satisfying as to the motivation of the killer), but (view spoiler)[Kate and Lee's legal marriage at San Francisco City Hall seemed rather tacked on. It doesn't really seem to link back to this particular book, and there isn't really an exploration of what this means to Kate. (hide spoiler)]
—Kate
I read this book after reading "the Beekeeper's Apprentice", also by Laurie King. She writes two series - one a Sherlock Holmes series and another a present day San Francisco detective series. This book is of the San Francisco ilk, but involves the murder of a man obsessed with Sherlock Holmes.I didn't really like the book too much. Good things were that it was readable and the descriptions of San Francisco were vivid. On the bad side, despite being sherlockian, the plot left a lot to be desired. Several times I silently was saying "what@!". The story within a story was about a B-/C+, also my final grade for the book. I'm skipping the San Francisco books and going back to London.
—Kristin
This one was pretty good, a bit better than the others. However, I wish the GoodReads scoring system was on a 1-10 basis so that I could more accurately rate it according to my taste.I read the first three books in this series and skipped right to number 5, having jumped about twelve years in the characters' lives, during which time a lot of changes have been made - all in all, these changes were all a little "goody-two-shoes" (or is that goody-too-shoes?) for me.Anyway, the gist of the story concerns the San Francisco murder of one of the world's leading experts on Sherlock Holmes and Arthur Conan Doyle. The murdered man goes so far as to live in a San Francisco mansion duplicating the living conditions of Holmesian London - on the first two floors. Even the electrical outlets have been removed and papered over.The murdered man also seems to think (have thought) that he has discovered an original unpublished Sherlock Holmes story written while Conan-Doyle visited San Francisco. It was found in a boarded up attic along with an antique typewriter on which it appears to have been written.Speculation as to why it was never realeased for publication concentrate on the murder of a (of course,) closeted gay Army officer who had been dating a transvestite performer.The ENTIRE 100 page manuscript is reproduced broken only by a page or paragraph in the life of the detective reading it.Then, the real life murder take on a great deal of parallels of the fictional one.I liked this Kate Martinelli mystery better than the others. I believe that much of this is because of the inclusion of the 100 page Holmes story.Ironically, the first ten Laurie R. King novels I read were the Mary Russell series, though I did like those more.
—Tony
