Set--
Quote:Metaphor maketh man.
This was intended as a general rather than a specific statement--although you would agree that you have some small talent as a wordsmith?
Or do you eschew understatement?
I'll chew understatement if it have the savor of a good meatloaf sammich.
Yes, i use understatement. I use it, i abuse, i beat it senseless at times.
I was unnecessarily testy in my response. I do beg your pardon.
Et pax tecum, Oh Thou Two Dozen Nods . . .
After Doyle ressurrected Holmes, he was never really quite the same, having less emphasis on legal conduct of investigation. There was a story, I forgot which, that he trespassed into this blackmailer's house, and then witnessed a distraught woman kill the blackmailer. The next day, Holmes did not tell the police about this. Funny that it took a ferryman to make Doyle realized the change, or so the introduction of my collection volume II says...
Set, I'll see if I can dig up the titles of those stories. The monkey-gland one is in one of the later collections, 20th Century. I've misplaced my Complete Sherlock, might have to take a trip to the library.
To answer your original question, they are really well written detective stories, with a central character who is kind of like an eccentric superhero. Also, they are about the triumph of brains over brawn.
Re: The Game's Afoot: Arthur Conan Doyle
Noddy24 wrote:One hundred and forty-six years ago Arthur Conan Doyle was born.
For more than 50 years I've been trying to understand why he has deep emotional appeal for thousands of educated and perceptive readers.
Despite readings and rereadings, ACD doesn't "speak" to me in the way that many other authors do.
Can anyone explain?
I LOVE Arthur Conan Doyle's stories. Sherlock Holmes is my hero. But then, I am a mystery buff and British mystery stories are my favourites! 
