The Beekeeper's Apprentice
Precisely written but nothing out of the ordinary way for fiction; not especially clever or artistic, certainly nothing quotable.
Obviously written by a woman, with slight feminism added on top of that. Predictable; leadingly obvious. Pathetically cliche at times.
Decent fiction, but not a very good "detective" story.
And yet, despite all that, I enjoyed it immensely!!!! I even accidentally reserved the "large print" copy of the book, and when I first started reading asked myself "gosh, can I continue with this font size?" but about 10 pages later was so completely engrossed I had forgotten all about it. I just couldn't put it down!
While I do think the above criticisms are all true, the only thing that actually bothered me about The Beekeeper's Apprentice was the character of Sherlock Holmes. Having personally read many of the origional stories surrounding that character, and being particularly attached to the Jeremy Northam (do I have the right actor's name?) TV series, I was disappointed with the liberties taken with his character that, I felt, weakened his (and consequently, the whole book's) credibility. The author was good enough to give an excuse for the differences in character, but in the end she created a whole new character under an assumed name.
Plus, the ambiguous, or I should say, ambivalent nature of the relationship between Holmes and Russell was a little distracting... as it seemed to be the real plot of the book.
I thought it was hilarious that the little kidnapped girl's name was Jessica Simpson.
This is a truly good cotton-candy read: probably bad as a steady diet, but a delightful oh-so-tasty treat! Thank you for the fun, enjoyable pick to whomever is responsible.
posted by return home gnome @ 11:35 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
To me it's more like a favorite kind of tea with a different kind of tea cup to drink it from. I quote from these books all the time and read excerpts to my husband after I laugh out loud!
I am of course thoroughly disappointed that you didn�t enjoy my book as much as I do. Although it is the weakest book in the series I enjoy it as an introduction to the further adventures of one of my favorite men. I love Mary Russell and I think she is the perfect addition to the Sherlock Holmes tales. I am actually very picky about my �add-on� Holmes amusement. I HATED the most recent movie done with Rupert Everett as Holmes. It was horrid and had so many mistakes and dumb plot twists that it wasn�t even remotely a part of the original character. And I am actually not a big fan of the Jeremy Northam tv series or any other film remake of Holmes. I like the Basil Rathbone movies but only because IT IS Basil Rathbone and not because it is any closer to the truth of Conan Doyle�s original character. I think that the Laurie R King books come closer to the original then any other I have read and yet add more humanity to him without detracting from his intelligence. If you have read any other books that you think do a better job please give me the information so that I can read them too! I�ll read just about anything once and I am always looking for new books as I go through them like coffee on a Monday morning!
My favorite books in the series are, �O, Jerusalem� and �Justice Hall�. But the others are very enjoyable too.
I guess what it truly comes down to is that we have very different tastes because we are different people, which is wonderful! I hope that you enjoyed it at least a little bit and I hope I learn things from books that you recommend!
Sky. I'm afraid I tend to come off a bit strong: I really did enjoy this book.
Particularly, much more than I am enjoying Mythology! right now, which is boring my socks off even though it is my "pick" (I'm not actually chosing any books for this club).
I felt a bit of what Elr is describing as I read the book, but I found it a delightful read nonetheless. I don't think I'll like it as much as you do, Sky, but I'm glad you recommended it! I'll have to check out the ones you mention as your favourites in the series.
Mainly I was annoyed by how the author kept trotting out Mary's feminism and making such a big deal about it. Any intelligent youngster is obliged to be a bit cocky and headstrong, but the dialogue and condescension felt a bit much at times.
I thought the character of Holmes was pretty well represented, and it was so refreshing to have someone point out what has always irked me about Watson!
I did think the plot was a bit weak, though. It was a lot more philosophical and relational than actually mysterious or puzzling, as in some seedy London mystery a la vintage Holmes. Left me feeling a bit of an anticlimax. But I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, and read it pretty much straight through, which speaks for its fascination!
FUN PICK, Sky! I think you should pick more of our books. ;D (Elizabeth Peters was an excellent selection in the last club.)
Well, I loved this book in its entirety. After reading Rose's comments I was expecting a rage for feminism but I really didn't catch any. Sure, she talked about being a woman and that somehow being superior. But that was a reference made almost at the very beginning of the story. Beyond that it was just an adventurous girl. Or, that's how I took it. I liked her a lot.
I really don't have anything bad to say about this. Elr called me when I was in the middle of the last chapter and I didn't feel like talking. I've been reading this book pretty much non-stop beginning to end! ;D
Thanks for the read. Have I mentioned how very fun it was? I loved the "aged" perspective on Holmes. It was just an interesting way to play with his character. I can't say I'd enjoy that if someone did that with, say, Anne. I'm not as attached to Sherlock which is perhaps why I could completely disregard any liberties taken with his character. I have some other friends I think would enjoy this.
Thanks!
Post a Comment
<< Home