In this second novel of Sherlock Holmes's Dr John Watson continues introducing the world to the singular methods of his strange friend, Mr. Sherlock Holmes.

He starts the book with a study in deduction, looses his temper, and then cools down at Holmes's explanations. Then a singular customer appears in the stage with a strange case. This case leads to a terrific murder with outlandish murderers.

As usual, Watson, as dumb as a frog, cannot see a thing that his friend Holmes, as cleaver as a fox, can spot so easily.

The story here is a bit slow, especially in the capture of the villains, but it ends in a thrilling manhunt, and then in an unearthly account of the major villain.

This novel, in my opinion, is the best Sherlock Holmes's ever written by Doyle. I think any Holmes's fan must read it.

A fabulous treasure dogged by murder. A trans-racial oath of loyalty. A greedy major, a cannibal pigmy, and a peg-legged convict. Mix in a pig-headed police investigator and a brilliant-but-flawed amateur detective, and you have the makings of a first-class mystery.

Miss Mary Morstan, the recipient of yearly gifts of pearls from an anonymous benefactor, receives a summons declaring her a wronged woman and promising riches if she replies. She enlists the aid of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson, and finds herself in the middle of a locked-room murder mystery. If the mystery can only be solved, she will become the richest woman in England.

Holmes, in a virtuoso performance, solves the murder, finds the missing treasure, brings the killer to justice, and learns the strange tale of "The Four." Did I mention that Dr. Watson winds up married to Miss Morstan?

The format of this sequel to "A Study in Scarlet" follows basically the same pattern as the original Sherlock Holmes story. Holmes visits the scene of a baffling murder, draws amazing conclusions from his inspection of the scene, and relentlessly tracks down the villian, who then tells his story and turns out to be not such a bad guy after all.

I first read "Scarlet" and "Sign" as a pre-teenager, and they made an indelible impression on me. In my job I frequently visit murder scenes, and I believe that these two books are what have influenced me to perform inspections outside the crimescene tape.

An earlier reviewer remarked on Doyle's "politically incorrect" view of India. "The Sign of the Four" was written at the turn of the 19th century. We live in the 21st. We probably won't measure up to the 23rd century's yardstick for "political correctness" either.

A classic Holmes novel, this book is perhaps one of Sherlock's most puzzling mysteries. As told by Dr. Watson, this mystery may have been one of Holmes's toughest cases yet.

As Sherlock is injecting cocaine into his blood system, he sits down with placid relief, until there is a knock at the door. In enters the beautiful Mary Morstan, whom Watson immediately takes a fancy to. While Watson observes her beauty, Holmes observes her problem. It seems that she is a rather middle-class woman, with style and father in the military, who is currently stationed in India. He had recently wrote to her saying that he would come to visit. However, he never showed up when she went to pick him up. That was ten years ago. But starting six years ago, four years after his disappearance, Miss Morstan had been receiving mysterious packages containing pearls of great value, one a year. Having been contacted by her mysterious complimentor, should she go and meet him? Or should she stay home? The truth lies with in the book.

This book is a triumph for the celebrated novelist Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and I believe that many people would enjoy this book. Just to be specific, it would mainly be for people who are in the age group of around: 13 or older, and also those who are fond of the mystery novels and thrillers and anyone who could use a good book.

Sir Arthur Conan-Doyle was a complex and honorable man. Toward the end of his life he embraced spiritualisim as he did everything else, wholeheartedly, and this led to many people dismissing him as a crackpot. However, as author Daniel Stashower pointst out, such was not the case. Conan-Doyle really believed in life after death. This belief filled the void in his life that was left when he renounced his belief in the Catholic Church. Daniel Stashower has written an even-handed fair biography of Conan-Doyle. The book is well researched and Conan-Doyle comes to life on these pages. Conan-Doyle, of course, is best known for creating Sherlock Holmes but as Stashower shows Conan-Doyle wrote many more works of fiction and non-fiction in his long career. If you want to have an idea of what made the man behind Sherlock Holmes tick then I recommend this book highly.

Years ago I read the biographies of Conan Doyle by John Dickson Carr and Charles Higham, and even tried to get beyond Sherlock Holmes by reading as much as I could of Conan Doyle's other fiction. Therefore I thought I knew something about Conan Doyle as a writer and as a person, but Stashower's fine book was still a revelation to me; it's not an exaggeration to say that I found new insights into Sir Arthur on nearly every page.

Stashower has done his research, but he is also unafraid to use Conan Doyle's semiautobiographical fiction, not to mention his poetry, to provide windows into the inner Sir Arthur that Sir Arthur's own autobiography carefully conceals.

Sir Arthur, of course, created a character that (along with Tarzan) is one of the immortal icons of adventure fiction, a character as popular today as he was when his short stories first hit the STRAND Magazine like a thunderbolt. One thing everyone knows about Conan Doyle is how deeply he resented the fame of Sherlock Holmes, but even here Stashower has some startling information to relate.

He is particularly good on the last couple of decades of Sir Arthur's life, when his seemingly mindless advocacy of even the most infantile and transparently fradulent aspects of Spiritualism, and his output of nearly a dozen unreadable religious tracts, left almost all of his readers convinced he had lost his mind. His endorsement of the authenticity of some photographs of fairies supposedly taken by two little girls (who had actually cut the tiny figures out of very familiar magazine ads for Fairy Soap!), and his calling in a psychic detective to "solve" the not-very-mysterious disappearance of novelist Agatha Christie, were the final straws for even his most tolerant fans.

On top of it all Sir Arthur was a terrible judge of the relative merits of his own fiction, and anyone who attempts to read his entire fictional output, as I did some years ago and as Stashower obviously has, will see how sadly he frittered away and squandered his unique gifts as a "teller of tales."

How could a man who created one of the immortal icons of rationality be in person so gullible, irrational, foolish and unworldly? Well, Stashower does as good a job of explaining the apparent paradox as anyone will probably be able to do. Highly recommended.

Poor Sir Arthur Conan Doyle! Acclaimed for his creation of the supremely rational, preternaturally observant detective Sherlock Holmes, he spent many years in later life mocked for his belief in spiritualism, which he considered the "successor to traditional religious thought." Brave, headstrong, and reckless, Doyle was one of England's most vociferous believers in spirits, mediums, ectoplasm, messages from beyond the grave--and even fairies. He was a tireless lecturer on several continents, writing a raft of books on the subject and donating the royalties to various spiritualist organizations. His zeal may have been admired in some quarters, but it was almost universally derided, and in the last ten years of his life, it lost him most of his friends. What happened?

Daniel Stashower's well-written and highly entertaining light portrait of Doyle's career gives some simple but compelling answers. Though Scottish, Doyle was raised a Catholic, but abandoned his faith for agnosticism very early on. Yet he apparently was a born believer, just waiting for a cause. His inventive and appealing Sherlock Holmes stories never struck him as particularly worthy or important and he longed to give the world something of value (he also tried his hand at plays and historical novels). And like many other British citizens during World War I, Doyle suffered heavy family losses and ached for connection with his personal dead.

As Stashower relates with a brisk pace and gentle humor, warm-hearted Doyle's life reads as a succession of fiery causes. A formidable propagandist, Doyle would use his gifts as a writer and lecturer as well as his ever-growing celebrity to raise money and the public's consciousness time and time again. He fought human rights abuses in the Belgian Congo, supported the Boer War, argued for heightened British military preparedness before World War I, supported reforms in British divorce law, and injected himself into famous criminal trials he thought had been unjust. But spiritualism was his ultimate "holy crusade." Stashower minces no words in describing how Doyle was willing to accept or explain away even the most obvious frauds. He was noble and pathetic at the same time and Stashower makes us understand and sympathize with him, though we never see very far into Doyle's personality or his relationships. This is very much a biography of the public man, but given the subject's profound investment in publicizing what he held dear, that focus is appropriate and deeply satisfying.

This first of the Sherlock Holmes stories, A Study in Scarlet introduces Watson and Holmes and narrates the beginning of their ongoing partnership. Holmes' genius and his theory of deductive reasoning, which he presents in an article ambitiously titled "The Book of Life," is proven effective when he solves the case of a murder whose links extend as far as the Mormons in Utah. Detective connoisseurs will enjoy Holmes' humorously arrogant references to the fictional detectives of Poe and Gaboriau, among the first authors in the genre and influential for the Holmes stories. Though Doyle pitches some of the morbidity and philosophical profundity in his inheritance from authors like Poe, the reader who enjoys a good story - detective or not - will be pleased to find surprises, intrigue, and a little art jargon in the unraveling of the scarlet thread that runs through life and underlies the mysteries of the human mind.

I didn't like to read any books before, but after I have read this book , I become more and more interested in reading. I started to have motivation to read as many books as in my life.
" A Study in Scarlet " ( written by Conan Doyle ) is the first full-length novel appearance of Sherlock Holmes. And I know Sherlock Holmes is very famous detective in fiction. Therefore, I choose this book.I like Holmes's deduction the most. He has great power in observation and understanding in all types of crime. He is full of knowledge that can help him to solve the problem and he likes violin and opera. If his brain contains anything apart from these , he must try to forget them all as quick as possible.

I am quite interested in mystery. If you don't know which book is good to read , try to read the story about Sherlock Holmes . You must like it .

A Study in Scarlet is a good detective story, but certainly not Doyle's greatest. But it bears the distinction of being the novel which introduced the world to the legendary Sherlock Holmes. First appearing in 1887, it was not to be the greatest story about Sherlock Holmes, but it was the first. Doyle first introduces us to John H. Watson, a medical doctor recovering from duty in Afghanistan. Watson needs a room-mate, and a mutual acquaintance introduces both him and us to Holmes. So we come to know both Holmes, Watson, and the memorable 221B Baker Street.

Watson's first impressions of Holmes are merely that he is a man enshrouded in mystery and eccentricity, and Watson politely restrains his curiosity by avoiding asking too many intrusive questions, despite the parade of strange individuals that come to their apartment to consult Holmes, and despite his bemusement at Holmes' passion for playing the violin and his egotism. Watson's perplexation at Holmes' character and profession is slowly unravelled in the second chapter which Doyle appropriately titles 'The Science of Deduction'. Watson observes that 'his zeal for certain studies was remarkable, and within eccentric limits his knowledge was so extraordinarily ample and minute that his observations have fairly astounded me 'His ignorance was as remarkable as his knowledge. Of contemporary literature, philosophy and politics he appeared to know next to nothing ' That any civilized human being in this nineteenth century should not be aware that the earth travelled round the sun appeared to me to be such an extraordinary fact that I could hardly realize it.'(p11). Holmes apparently is brilliant at identifying a stain on your trousers, but completely ignorant about the most elementary contemporary political events.

Ironically, Watson's inability to deduce Holmes' profession proves that he lacks the very ability that he is seeking to uncover in Holmes: deduction. For Holmes doesn't just excel in specialized knowledge, but especially in the science of deduction and logic. By utilizing the skills of observation and analysis Holmes asserts that logic could solve all virtually all problems. In his words: 'From a drop of water, a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link of it. Like all other arts, the Science of Deduction and Analysis is one which can only be acquired by long and patient study, nor is life long enough to allow any mortal to attain the highest possible perfection in it. Before turning to those moral and mental aspects of the matter which present the greatest difficulties, let the inquirer begin by mastering more elementary problems. Let him, on meeting a fellow-mortal, learn at a glance to distinguish the history of the man, and the trade or profession to which he belongs. Puerile as such an exercise may seem, it sharpens the faculties of observation, and teaches on where to look and what to look for. By a mans' finger-nails, by his coat-sleeve, by his boots, by his trouser-knees, by the callosities of his forefinger and thumb, by his expression, by his shirtcuffs ' by each of these things a man's calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent inquirer in any case is almost inconceivable.' (p14-15). Watson calls this science of deduction 'ineffable twaddle', but as we know, this is the vintage Holmes we love and the very core of his being. Not only does he prove it to Watson by remarkably deducing that Watson had served duty in Afghanistan, but by collaring the criminal in a murder case.

The story itself consists in two parts: the first part introduces us to Holmes and Watson, and describes the murder of Enoch Drebber and his secretary Joseph Stangerson, and several failed attempts of Scotland Yard detectives to solve it, concluding with Holmes unmasking the real perpetrator, to the complete astonishment of all present. The second part is a flashback, explaining the background and motives for the murder, as finally Holmes relates the observations and deductions that led him to solving it. In short, 'the crime was the result of an old-standing and romantic feud, in which love and Mormonism bore a part.' (p103)

But what is fascinating about 'A Study in Scarlet' is not so much the mystery, but the man: Holmes himself. Doyle would later learn to eliminate some of the excess baggage present in this story (such as the extended flashback) and focus on Holmes and his deductions. The characterization of Holmes as an eccentric man driven by logic is wonderfully created for the first time in this novel. Already here is the foundation of the Sherlock Holmes that would become so successful in all of Doyle's later stories. A few quotes illustrate how the tone of the deductive Holmes is set: 'In solving a problem of this sort, the grand thing is to be able to reason backward. That is a very useful accomplishment, and a very easy one, but people do not practise it much.' (p99-100) 'There is no branch of detective science which is so important and so much neglected as the art of tracing footsteps.' (p100) 'You see, the whole thing is a chain of logical sequences without a break or flaw.' (p102)

Here the successful formula is already established: Scotland Yard is baffled, so is his foil the bumbling doctor Watson, and so are we the readers. Holmes has long solved the mystery before we have even begun identifying red herrings, and it is when he sits by the fire and explains to Watson the process of deduction that we curl up in delight. The partnership between the super-sleuth Holmes and his beloved side-kick Watson all starts here, and if you love Sherlock Holmes, you won't want to miss it!

As well as the creator of legendary sleuth Sherlock Holmes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was also something of an amateur detective himself. This book explores the many cases he involved himself with, although in most of them his part is minimal. However, he did help with some memorable investigations - Jack the Ripper, Dr Crippen and the disappearance of Agatha Christie for starters.

Unlike Holmes, though, most of Doyle's observations proved inconclusive. As well as this, the authorities were sometimes loath to accept his findings, and the author, Peter Costello, implies that several innocents were executed for wont of incriminating evidence. Throughout Doyle's long career, though, his crusading nature and willingness to stand up for the truth are impressive attributes.

This book concerns itself with Doyle as Holmes creator only in passing. Here we see the author as an ever-inquisitive seeker of solutions to real-life crimes, a passion he later directed to the Victorian fad of Spiritualism. Indeed, there are some crimes he claimed to have solved through consultation with then-famous mediums. Costello wisely leaves judgement on this score up to the reader.

As an addendum to Doyle's more familiar literary achievements, this book serves it purpose well and provides many interesting insights into the Victorian and Edwardian crime scene.

Holmes packs a lot into a short space. Undergraduate students have found it a bit heavy going, but for those willing to work through the text, it is profoundly insightful. A great introduction to various ethical philosophies in the West, their strengths and their shortcomings, with some chapters that apply the principles to specific ethical issues. The book is 17 years old but has a timelessness about it - unlike, say, John Stott's "Issues Facing Christians". Holmes does not give "current statistics" and tends to operate at the level of principle, which gives his work a helpful timelessness. Worth having on the shelf if you are a reader.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's acquired disdain for his own renowned detective creation is legendary, and 'tis said that when William Gillette wired him with the question, "May I marry Holmes?" (to a female character), Conan Doyle brusquely replied, "You may marry him or murder him or do what you like with him."

But one must draw the line somewhere. And notwithstanding Mollie Hardwick's excellent paean to the legend of Sherlock Holmes at the head of this collection of short stories, I wonder whether even Conan Doyle could have stomached some of these literary assaults upon it.

In "Sherlock Holmes and the Muffin", Dorothy Hughes presents us with a feminist Holmes and Watson who look forward to the day when women become doctors and scientists. Another swig of Women 100 Proof and Ms. Hughes would have had them lobbying from their 19th century perches for abortion on demand, free daycare, and a chocolate bar in the glove compartment of every SUV, a bottle of prozac in the pocket of every power suit.

And even THIS atrocity barely holds its own, as an atrocity, against the contemporary setting of Joyce Harrington's "The Adventure of the Gowanus Abduction", in which a delicate hippie-type Watson plays second fiddle to a ferocious liberated female Holmes - not only as "her" assistant but as "her " lover. Indeed, the story winds up with a broad hint of a rendezvous in the bedroom, but I think that this Watson will couple with this Holmes about as successfully as Tchaikovsky did with Antonina Milyukova.

This book also has its share of short stories that do considerably more justice to the Sherlockian tradition, and the best of these are Barry Jones's "The Shadows on the Lawn", Edward D. Hoch's "The Return of the Speckled Band", and Stuart Kaminsky's "The Final Toast". The Jones story, in particular, is very chilling.

But John Lutz's "The Infernal Machine" also deserves credit for craft and subtlety. The threat of an international conflagration and the new concept of the "horseless carriage" are crucial to the resolution of this story, and there's a passage in it where a young inventor asserts that in ten years, everyone in England will drive a horseless carriage. "Everyone?" Watson asks. "Come now!"

Holmes laughs and says, "Not you, Watson, not you, I'd wager."

How many readers realize that Lutz is paying homage to the last story in the Conan Doyle concordance, "His Last Bow", set on the eve of the first World War, in which Watson does indeed drive an automobile, in the guise of a chauffeur? Not many, I'd wager.

It must have taken a lot of commendable restraint for Lutz to simply rely on his readers' perspicacity and to resist the sore temptation of finding a way to directly point to the Conan Doyle story.

For that matter, Malcom Bell, the villain in the Kaminsky story, may be based upon Dr. Joseph Bell, one of Conan Doyle's medical instructors, who is said to have been the chief inspiration for Conan Doyle's creation of Sherlock Holmes.

Stephen King's contribution might be the cleverest, if not the best written. He apparently wrote his own Sherlock Holmes story in response to a challenge from the editors, but King's normal writing style doesn't quite click with the sober Watsonian chronicling presented by Conan Doyle.

And King is usually a good researcher, but this skill fails him on at least two occasions. He presents us with several images from the Victorian Era that Conan Doyle withheld from delicate sensibilities, including orphans losing all the teeth out of their jaws in sulphur factories by the age of ten and cruel boys in the East End teasing starving dogs with food held out of reach.

But the authentic Sherlock Holmes, having learned that Jory Hull was a painter and having deduced that he had no need of monetary support from his cruel father, would have further deduced - without asking Lestrade - that Jory probably gained his independence by painting professionally.

And the authentic Holmes, as Watson says in the Conan Doyle classic, "A Study in Scarlet", has a good practical knowledge of British law. Stephen King is surely wrong to have Holmes ask Lestrade what sort of treatment the murder suspects might expect to receive under it.

Still, we must be grateful to King for bringing to our attention the one case in the lexicon where Watson actually solves the mystery before Holmes does - and yes, it happens in a plausible manner. As Loren Estleman has pointed out, Holmes's brilliance wouldn't be appreciated by us as much if it were not for the buffer provided by the savvy but unremarkable earnestness of Watson's narrative. We admire Holmes, but we empathize more with his Boswell, and it's wonderful to learn of a case in which Watson has his moment in the sunlight.

This collection has its share of the good, the bad, the ugly, and the just plain silly (Peter Lovesey's "The Curious Computer"). The reader is advised to judge each story on its own merits. Don't be too impressed with Dame Jean Conan Doyle's endorsement of the volume as a whole. But do ask, as another renowned English author once did, "What's in a name?"

"The New Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" was like a breath of fresh air. Lately I have come across some anthologies which just aren't up to par as far as the quality of the plots. These stories I found to be entertaining and fun to read. Two which stood out for me were "Shadows on the Lawn" and "The Return of the Speckled Band". There's even a story in there for Watson lovers, "The Doctor's Case", penned by none other than Stephen King. Though there were a few which I didn't really care for, this is a worthwhile read.

I love anything about Holmes and Watson. These were well written stories that I truly enjoyed reading. It took me back to when I read all of Doyle's stories about Holmes and Watson. I recommend it highly.

This edition by Penguin contains the full-length Sherlock Holmes novel THE VALLEY OF FEAR along with selected short stories from THE RETURN OF SHERLOCK HOLMES and HIS LAST BOW. THE VALLEY OF FEAR was written after Conan Doyle killed off Holmes in 1892, but is set before Holmes' disappearance at the Reichenbach Falls. THE RETURN OF SHERLOCK HOLMES opens with a story that shows that Holmes didn't die in his struggle with Professor Moriarty after all.

These stories show a decline in Conan Doyle's writing. As Iain Pears wrote in the introduction to another Penguin edition of Holmes stories, in the latter half of his life Conan Doyle turned to mysticism and spiritualism and was increasingly unable to portray the cold rationalism of Sherlock Holmes. Many of the stories lack motivation. The story HIS LAST BOW, which is final story in the canon according to Holmesian time, is a poorly-plotted bit of propaganda for England in World War I.

There are footnotes to each story, compiled by Ed Glinert. An expert on literature set in London, Glinert explains the geographical settings of the Holmes stories, and defines anachronistic terms that are no longer use. He also points out the mistakes Arthur Conan Doyle frequently made in his stories, which are often quite amusing (contradicting timelines, Conan Doyles' incomplete understanding of obscure sciencs, etc).

Because of the illuminating introduction and the helpful footnotes, I'd recommend over any others this edition of THE VALLEY OF FEAR AND SELECTED CASES