The Hound of the Baskervilles<\/i> by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle<\/p>\n
Well, it wasn’t near as bad as I had remembered from High School. In fact, it was just fine. My only complaint is that there was too little Sherlock Holmes in it.<\/p>\n
The narrative problem, I’m assuming, with having Holmes in the entirety of a full-length novel, is that he’s simply going to solve the mystery too fast. If you want to stretch the story into a full length book, you really have to have Watson on his own semi-bumbling through the mystery as in this novel, or you have to insert a big stretch of backstory (as in A Study in Scarlet<\/i>). <\/p>\n
Otherwise, you’ve got to make the mystery really complicated, with many layers of the onion. But that requires blowing a lot of ideas on one story. Best to stretch it out over several books, I imagine, and pad, pad, pad.<\/p>\n
So, if a second reading through the prism of my 38 year old eyes redeemed The Hound of the Baskervilles<\/i>, does this mean I need to revisit Great Expectations<\/i>?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Hound of the Baskervilles by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Well, it wasn’t near as bad as I had remembered from High School. In fact, it was just fine. My only complaint is that there was too little Sherlock Holmes … Continue reading