Clique em uma foto para ir ao Google Livros
Carregando... The Beekeeper's Apprentice (original: 1994; edição: 2002)de Laurie R. King (Autor)
Informações da ObraThe Beekeeper's Apprentice de Laurie R. King (1994)
Best Historical Fiction (123) Favorite Series (39) » 27 mais Historical Fiction (84) Female Author (123) Top Five Books of 2013 (273) Summer Reads 2014 (43) Books Read in 2013 (121) Top Five Books of 2015 (380) Books Read in 2016 (2,826) Female Protagonist (404) Books Read in 2022 (2,033) Books Read in 2017 (2,989) Carole's List (243) KayStJ's to-read list (284) Detective Stories (130) Books tagged favorites (354) Victorian Period (108) Carregando...
Registre-se no LibraryThing tpara descobrir se gostará deste livro. Ainda não há conversas na Discussão sobre este livro. First, this is Sherlock, not beekeeping, as the cover and title, and even alternate title lead one to believe. (I tend to be a judge-a-book-by-its-cover person unless it's been recommended to me.) This is quite an old book, tho that doesn't matter as it's set in the early 20th century with Sherlock having retired to the countryside. This book is about a young woman who is equally sherlockian in her intellect, and how she becomes Sherlock's apprentice. They solve a few cases together, and we generally see them become fast friends and intellectual equals. I enjoyed the cases, they are as well done as any other Sherlock retelling, and Mary, the main character, is fun to follow around, though she does suffer from being a bit too perfect. Sherlock is also given a generous reimagining, veering away from the abrasive, neurodivergent recluse and becoming a wise kindly old man for the most part. One might imagine that's how he would be to his intellectual equal, but it's certainly a change. I was swept away in the world created here though, so I will try the next in the series. I thoroughly enjoyed the adventures of Mary Russell, a teenaged genius who matches wits and joins forces with the "retired" Sherlock Holmes. She's a character I'd like to spend more time with. The story is well-plotted, and exciting in all the right ways, but I was totally bewildered by the mechanics of the climactic scene, and that might influence my decision to carry on with this series.
But at the heart of the novel is not the historical accuracy or the gender commentary; rather, the core of the story is the partnership between Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes. It's a partnership between equals, of two keen minds, two clever, stubborn, and formidable people who nevertheless feel the psychological weight of the profession they have chosen to follow. Moreover, there's none of that tired and overdone sexual tension that one might expect from a story with two protagonists of the opposite gender. There are no romantic interludes, tense moments, or pensive fantasizing. Instead, rather like the recent adaptation Elementary, the story does something remarkable: portray a friendship and a relationship between two unique characters of opposite genders without going down the tired, old, (and, in the case of Holmesian adaptations, particularly overdone) path of romance. Está contido emFoi inspirada porTem um comentário sobre o textoTem um guia de estudo para estudantesPrêmiosNotable Lists
A chance meeting with a Sussex beekeeper turns into a pivotal, personal transformation when fifteen-year-old Mary Russell discovers that the beekeeper is the reclusive, retired detective Sherlock Holmes, who soon takes on the role of mentor and teacher. Não foram encontradas descrições de bibliotecas. |
Current DiscussionsNenhum(a)Capas populares
Google Books — Carregando... GênerosClassificação decimal de Dewey (CDD)813.54Literature English (North America) American fiction 20th Century 1945-1999Classificação da Biblioteca do Congresso dos E.U.A. (LCC)AvaliaçãoMédia:
É você?Torne-se um autor do LibraryThing. |
2) On the minus side: This is fan-fiction of the worst kind, the kind with a Mary-Sue original character who is the author's avatar, who is perfect and lovable and wonderful beyond all measure. The character who inspired the fan-fiction only gets the role of fawning and gushing about how wonderful the Mary-Sue character is.
I might have been able to forgive point 2 because of point 1. However, point 3 kills this one for me:
3) On the minus side: Dr. Watson. At the very heart of the Sherlock Holmes canon is his friendship with Watson. Sure, he is not as brilliant as Holmes (who is?... well, Mary Russell is, apparently), but he is a loyal and valued companion, honest, brave and full of integrity, whose friendship makes Holmes a better man. Holmes and Watson care about each other, and that is shown in the canon many times, specially at moments of danger. Here there's only room for Mary Russell, and Sherlock needs to be completely devoted to admiring how perfect Mary Russell is. There's no room for Watson in that game, so the writer gets rid of him in the worst possible way. When the author remembers him he is treated as a bumbling idiot whom Holmes and Mary Russell openly despise. Mary Russell comes across as a conceited idiot, and Holmes is so out of character that there's no way to salvage this. ( )