This might be a
controversial thing to say about a book that won a coveted ‘Edgar’ award from
the Mystery Writers of America, but On Conan Doyle,
by Michael Dirda, the long-time book critic for the Washington Post, is a bit of a mixed bag. Its strengths include its
opening section, when Dirda memorably recreates the first time he ever read
Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles
as a child and there is much in this vein in the rest of the book about that
most unfashionable of subjects, the love of reading. As a celebration of that
love, On Conan Doyle works, and it’s
just as valuable in encouraging its reader to look beyond the Holmes stories
and novels and take in the rest of Doyle’s broad oeuvre. This is important not only because Dirda writes
convincingly of the strengths of Doyle’s short fiction, his historical novels,
his memoir, and so on, but also because Doyle himself felt (correctly) that
Holmes’ success overshadowed his other achievements as an author. Where Dirda
stumbles is when he discusses at (too) great length his participation in the
Baker Street Irregulars, an illustrious company of Holmes fans to which he is
obviously very honored to belong, as he should be. The problem is that Dirda’s
pride at being a member of the club is not infectious and his lengthy
descriptions of the group’s social events are self-indulgent and tedious, as is
his reproduction of some of the (not very funny) writing he’s done for the
Irregulars. Boyish enthusiasm can be charming in a boy, but in a man…not so
much. Set that section of the book aside, however, and On Conan Doyle is a very interesting addition to Sherlockiana.
No comments:
Post a Comment