Scan barcode
Reviews
The Scientific Sherlock Holmes: Cracking the Case with Science and Forensics by James O'Brien
tracey_stewart's review
3.0
When I think of Holmes, I think of a scientific method of deduction. I think of a human version of a CSI lab before there were CSI labs, able to observe and interpret the smallest grains or threads of evidence and effortlessly build a case against the evil evildoer. I admit, I haven't read the canon lately, so I have to take the author's word for it when numbers are cited – the frequency of occasions when Holmes used a magnifying glass or a microscope, or dabbled in chemistry. Which I have no problem doing – it's obvious that Mr. O'Brien was thorough in his tallies. He's thorough in every aspect of the book. Which, in a way, is why it did not rate more than three stars.
Let me 'splain.
This book reminded me a little of one of the Shakespeare biographies I've encountered lately, which tries to bake a cake with about a half a cup of batter. They present the little information that exists from a different angle, and basically fill in the rest with art and artifice – like using a styrofoam layer for that cake. With The Scientific Sherlock Holmes, the angle is a good one: see, here is how science is involved in Sherlock Holmes's investigations. The practice, though, brings in the styrofoam. There are fifty-six short stories and four novels ("long stories") in the canon, and when all is said and done there isn't much more batter to work with here than for a Shakespeare bio.
The book is broken into sections relating to the different sciences, and each one augments the information derived from the Holmes canon with anecdotes from reality, and discussion of where Doyle obtained his information. The section on fingerprinting, for example, is a nice little history of the science, including its earliest appearance in fiction in Mark Twain's Pudd'nhead Wilson. The section on astronomy – dealing more with Moriarty than with Holmes – brings in an acquaintance of Doyle's who was the likely source for the references. The section on handwriting analysis goes into some detail about the Lindbergh kidnapping, among others, and that on footprints (which was a little disappointing; I didn't realize footprint evidence had been so thoroughly discredited) went, surprisingly, into the OJ Simpson trial.
Another way in which the little available material was puffed up to fill the 208 pages was simple repetition. Some of the same points were made (in nearly the same phrasing) two or more times. In a longer work reiteration can be helpful, but this was fairly brief (and illustrations, an appendix, bibliography, and index took up a fair amount of space). (The appendix is concerned with the totally off-topic but wildly weird and interesting "Doyle conspiracies" – I had no idea that he was blamed for everything from an archaeological hoax to, God bless us, the Jack the Ripper killings. There's a certain irony to the latter given that the most recent Holmes I've read was [b:Dust and Shadow|4543979|Dust and Shadow An Account of the Ripper Killings by Dr. John H. Watson|Lyndsay Faye|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1347948850s/4543979.jpg|4593256].)
The exploration of science in the Holmes stories was fun and interesting, but where it would have made for an excellent longish article, it simply was not enough to fill a book.
This was a Netgalley advance copy, read with thanks.
Let me 'splain.
This book reminded me a little of one of the Shakespeare biographies I've encountered lately, which tries to bake a cake with about a half a cup of batter. They present the little information that exists from a different angle, and basically fill in the rest with art and artifice – like using a styrofoam layer for that cake. With The Scientific Sherlock Holmes, the angle is a good one: see, here is how science is involved in Sherlock Holmes's investigations. The practice, though, brings in the styrofoam. There are fifty-six short stories and four novels ("long stories") in the canon, and when all is said and done there isn't much more batter to work with here than for a Shakespeare bio.
The book is broken into sections relating to the different sciences, and each one augments the information derived from the Holmes canon with anecdotes from reality, and discussion of where Doyle obtained his information. The section on fingerprinting, for example, is a nice little history of the science, including its earliest appearance in fiction in Mark Twain's Pudd'nhead Wilson. The section on astronomy – dealing more with Moriarty than with Holmes – brings in an acquaintance of Doyle's who was the likely source for the references. The section on handwriting analysis goes into some detail about the Lindbergh kidnapping, among others, and that on footprints (which was a little disappointing; I didn't realize footprint evidence had been so thoroughly discredited) went, surprisingly, into the OJ Simpson trial.
Another way in which the little available material was puffed up to fill the 208 pages was simple repetition. Some of the same points were made (in nearly the same phrasing) two or more times. In a longer work reiteration can be helpful, but this was fairly brief (and illustrations, an appendix, bibliography, and index took up a fair amount of space). (The appendix is concerned with the totally off-topic but wildly weird and interesting "Doyle conspiracies" – I had no idea that he was blamed for everything from an archaeological hoax to, God bless us, the Jack the Ripper killings. There's a certain irony to the latter given that the most recent Holmes I've read was [b:Dust and Shadow|4543979|Dust and Shadow An Account of the Ripper Killings by Dr. John H. Watson|Lyndsay Faye|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1347948850s/4543979.jpg|4593256].)
The exploration of science in the Holmes stories was fun and interesting, but where it would have made for an excellent longish article, it simply was not enough to fill a book.
This was a Netgalley advance copy, read with thanks.
halberdbooks's review
informative
slow-paced
3.5
While it reads more like an essay than a book -- fitting for what is actually an academic text -- this was still a good read. Well-researched, insightful, and with a sense of playful irony, this book both praises and criticizes the science at work in Doyle's most famous work. My eyes did glaze over during the pages filled with equations, but those pages weren't written for a casual reader like me. And there is nothing wrong with that. I am glad to have read this.
that_bookworm_guy's review
informative
reflective
slow-paced
3.5
This book is one that you need to sit somewhere quiet and read certain pages over because you'll miss something. A super interesting book that breaks down some of the science used within the stories, as well as ACD's understanding and experiences with science and how he used some cutting edge techniques that still are used today. As well as some that have been discovered to not be so useful.
This book is set out in an easy to read and understand way, a brilliant read for those who love Sherlock Holmes and science.
This book is set out in an easy to read and understand way, a brilliant read for those who love Sherlock Holmes and science.
michellegopaul_'s review against another edition
totally devoured this book
but i was a tinnnyyy bit underwhelmed. the majority of the book itself was just recap, and even when he finally got into the science it felt like he was just restating the cases rather than really analyzing and explaining scientifically what was going on.
there were still a bunch of really cool takeaways and deep dives that i thoroughly enjoyed though, so overall not bad at all!
but i was a tinnnyyy bit underwhelmed. the majority of the book itself was just recap, and even when he finally got into the science it felt like he was just restating the cases rather than really analyzing and explaining scientifically what was going on.
there were still a bunch of really cool takeaways and deep dives that i thoroughly enjoyed though, so overall not bad at all!
sigo's review
3.0
This book had too many summaries of the plotlines of almost all of the sixty Sherlock Holmes stories and not enough exploration of Sherlock as a scientist. Additionally, I came into the book believing that it would be about how Sherlock uses science and forensics to understand his cases, but it was more a discussion of the science he does outside of the confines of a case. The book was well written and the author obviously knew what he was talking about, but the topic seems more suited for a lecture at a Sherlock convention and not as a book adaptation.
maiakobabe's review
3.0
The Scientific Sherlock Holmes is a scholarly fan's discussion of the use of various scientific methods for crime solving in the Sherlock Holmes stories. The book includes chapters on finger prints, foot prints, hand writing analysis, cryptography and tracking dogs, comparing each of these as used by Holmes against their uses in modern criminal cases. I was surprised to learn that many of the techniques discussed (particularly finger prints) were, at the time of Conan Doyle's writing, revolutionary new ideas in police work. Also examined are Holmes' knowledge of chemistry, biology, geology, physics and mathematics. Two sections I particularly enjoyed were a discussion of false gems and brief afterward about famous hoaxes credited to Conan Doyle himself. Google “The Piltdown Man” if you are curious about the later.
More...