Sherlock Holmes reread: Silver Blaze
Dec. 4th, 2024 01:24 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vivdunstanStarting my reread of The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes. And going to discuss spoilers so
This story is well regarded by many, including Conan Doyle himself. But I personally find it quite unsatisfying. Perhaps part of the reason is that I've never been into horses, unlike some of my cousins. And I also find the plot over filled with red herrings, and rather haphazard.
In this latest reread all I could remember for definite is that the missing race horse ("Silver Blaze") ends up in disguise, with his white colouring concealed, only to be revealed by Holmes near the end. But I forgot almost everything else.
As Holmes deduces - being frustratingly vague about everything as he does - I did pick up on the clear clue that the dead trainer must have had an alter ego and was keeping another woman in London, as well as his wife in Devon. So not to be trusted, and hardly an innocent victim. But I definitely didn't remember who killed him.
As I say, though, this feels like a story with too many red herrings. Even when you know the plot there are too many elements to be discarded. It feels remarkably untidy for a Sherlock Holmes story. Though many admire it.
Of course its perhaps most famous element is in the following quote, from a discussion between the police inspector and Holmes:
But apart from that element the story doesn't feel especially memorable to me.
This story is well regarded by many, including Conan Doyle himself. But I personally find it quite unsatisfying. Perhaps part of the reason is that I've never been into horses, unlike some of my cousins. And I also find the plot over filled with red herrings, and rather haphazard.
In this latest reread all I could remember for definite is that the missing race horse ("Silver Blaze") ends up in disguise, with his white colouring concealed, only to be revealed by Holmes near the end. But I forgot almost everything else.
As Holmes deduces - being frustratingly vague about everything as he does - I did pick up on the clear clue that the dead trainer must have had an alter ego and was keeping another woman in London, as well as his wife in Devon. So not to be trusted, and hardly an innocent victim. But I definitely didn't remember who killed him.
As I say, though, this feels like a story with too many red herrings. Even when you know the plot there are too many elements to be discarded. It feels remarkably untidy for a Sherlock Holmes story. Though many admire it.
Of course its perhaps most famous element is in the following quote, from a discussion between the police inspector and Holmes:
"Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
"To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
"The dog did nothing in the night-time."
"That was the curious incident," remarked Sherlock Holmes.
But apart from that element the story doesn't feel especially memorable to me.