Russell A. Brown

I wanted so badly to like this novel. It's a brilliant concept. Bringing Sherlock Holmes and Oscar Wilde together and letting the fireworks entertain and dazzle us. But somehow this novel falls short of my expectations.

The plotting is competent; the historic details seem authentic without being obtrusive. The character of Watson is particularly well drawn, but Holmes and Wilde stumble over their own dialogue. In an attempt to invest these two extraordinary speakers with the power of their own words, I think Brown lost the characters. Wilde is too witty, too sardonic, and Holmes relies too much on things he has said in past adventures. The two characters are too buried under their own quotes and references to breathe and, as a result, the novel suffers.

Worth the read for diehard fans or Wilde or Holmes or both, but if you have not read Wilde or Arthur Conan Doyle's work, start there.… (altro)

The high point of the book is the wit and humour of Oscar Wilde. I had to stop and laugh in about a dozen places. The low point is the portrayal of Watson’s orderly Murray as a homosexual who has harboured a crush on Watson for fifteen years. This stretches credibility beyond the belief of any normal reader.
Finally, did I like the book? Definitely no! It is certainly not entertaining. The constant use of quotes from the Canon is distracting, especially when used out of their original context. The kindest thought I can muster up for this book is that it is most assuredly thought provoking and informative in a historical sense.
Reviewed by: Roger F Kellogg F.I.A., Originally appeared in The Gaslight Gazette… (altro)