Gerry's Reviews > Art in the Blood

I am a huge Sherlock Holmes fan but I believe one cannot beat the Conan Doyle originals. But I am always prepared to try a Holmes' pastiche, if only to see how more modern writers portray him and Watson.

However, 'Art in the Blood' just didn't do it for me at all; try as she might Bonnie MacBird just did not get that Holmes/Watson relationship quite right and with brother Mycroft regularly muscling in - attempting to be as clever as Sherlock - and the introduction of such as Toulouse Lautre (why?) and French detective Jean Vidocq (a poor characterisation), the plot rambles along, flitting about all over the place.

There is a stolen statue, an apparent kidnapping of a child, a French woman attacked on the streets of Montmartre and bodies of young children discovered and this little lot needs putting together to get the gist of the story. It was certainly a convoluted plot, flitting about all over the place, leaving this particular reader wondering what on earth was going on and how it was all going to come together.

I did start the book with eager anticipation and in fairness there are some good ambient moments, particularly early on in the book, but my enthusiasm soon waned and the more I read the worse the book got. And when I read Watson's remark, 'I had begun to doubt our own abilities. Holmes and I had made one mistake after another', I just thought 'No, surely not Holmes and Watson?' In the end I was delighted to finish the book (how I am not sure as it tested my reading patience) but it left me with an empty feeling and a couldn't care less attitude. What a pity.

So, despite my liking for Holmes' pastiches I don't think I will be trying any others in this series. Sorry Bonnie MacBird.