A Study in Scarlet Women

I enjoyed this book as a feminist twist on the traditional Sherlock stories. The exploration of how different Sherlock's stories would be as a woman in a time when gender inequality was so pronounced is provocative and allows for different plot vehicles. Some of those vehicles are questionable if not a little cutesy for an otherwise gritty story. Other than that tone mismatch, I liked the concept, was engaged in the mystery, and found the characters likable, though not terribly well-developed. I did get frustrated that a romantic plot-line was introduced, wary of it wading into the dollar romance category... but then again, the little tweenie part of my heart kind of enjoyed that, too.

From what I've read, the later books in the series are better and this just lays the groundwork. So I may continue on with it.

TW: non-explicit sexual abuse of minors.

I was suggested this book by my bibliologist at MyTBR – in this case TBR stands for tailored book recommendations. I thought it would be fun to tell someone all about my book preferences and see what they would recommend ... and it totally was.

One of the things I wanted was books with strong female characters, thrillers and mysteries, historical stuff.

This Sherlock Holmes retelling for me. I loved the Victorian setting. I've read histories of the time, biographies of Queen Victoria, and recently read The Five about the women murdered by Jack the Ripper. The Five revealed in depth the overwhelmingly odds stacked against a woman in that time if she didn't have the protection of a man or respectability.

This is clearly the place and time where A Study is set, and Charlotte definitely deals with that reality. The tone is fairly light, and I of course didn't worry that Charlotte would come to real harm, but I enjoyed how it echoed the truth of the time.

The mystery was pretty good. I don't think it was the main reason I enjoyed the story, which for me would be the characters and setting. Without spoiling anything, I appreciated how it dealt with sensitive matters of import as opposed to having the motive be frivolous and unrelatable. What would you kill for is always an interesting question. What I'm saying is I liked the resolution, but the journey was more fine than fascinating.

One of the main characters is an Inspector Treadles. I am very interested in where his story goes, and how he evolves. He is a great blend of progressive and a man of his time, with limiting beliefs about women, and their agency. I want to know how continued contact with an intelligent, independent woman shapes him – and his marriage – going forward.

I also love Charlotte's sister, Livy, and her confidante Mrs. Watson. Livy is every bit as interesting as Charlotte, and more trapped in her life than Charlotte, which I don't imagine will continue for too long. I want to see what her future holds.

I like what Mrs. Watson brings to the table, and the tools and insights she offers.

Charlotte herself is of course perceptive, but not without blind spots of flaws. She is cool-headed, but also capable of love, and capable of compassion that can lead her into making mistakes. I love that she loves fashion, and how that and her angelic appearance allows for people to underestimate her. I think she wears the clothes she does for her own enjoyment, and I think her efforts to keep it at 1 and 1/2 chins, or whatever, is based on what she and she alone likes to see in the mirror. I am a fan of stories that don't claim that the only women who can be heroes are ones that fully emulate traditionally masculine ideals.

It was a little challenging keeping the characters straight, since I feel I should come up with a criticism. That is the thing that bothered me the most.

DNFI read 60% of the book, I can say I have read enough to decide to stop reading it. There are too many good books out there to waste time reading crap like this.I read it because it was recommended as Autumnal reading. Probably because Sherlock Holmes is considered very Autumnal, and this is a Sherlock Holmes fan fiction. Now, I was suspicious, because they also recommended [b:The Beekeeper's Apprentice 91661 The Beekeeper's Apprentice (Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes, #1) Laurie R. King https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1590945421l/91661.SY75.jpg 891863] and [b:The Strange Case of the Alchemist's Daughter 34728925 The Strange Case of the Alchemist's Daughter (The Extraordinary Adventures of the Athena Club, #1) Theodora Goss https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1490794116l/34728925.SY75.jpg 45924715], which also are more or less Sherlock Holmes fan fiction, and I have read the Daughter and it's BS, and I fear the Apprentice is that also, so I don't want to read it. Read the 1-star reviews, and believe them. If there are things said there that make you feel you don't want to read this book, do yourself a favor and read something else. I actually liked [b:Good Night, Mr. Holmes 552534 Good Night, Mr. Holmes (Irene Adler, #1) Carole Nelson Douglas https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1437091135l/552534.SY75.jpg 2903822], so if you want to read a feminist version of Sherlock Holmes, read that. It's Irene Adler fan fiction :-D (But do read the 1-star reviews first, some people don't like it for reasons, and if their reasons seem good to you, just don't waste your time reading that either.)So - I think my dislike started from the first page. The characters are caricatures and cardboard at that. Her father and mother can do only one thing and react the same way to everything that happens. Every man has a mistress, or more than one. Young women discuss sex freely. People who have never worn a Victorian outfit complain about how uncomfortable it is. I hate when the authors don't seem to understand the general attitudes of the era they are writing about. That was one of my biggest problems with [b:Outlander 10964 Outlander (Outlander, #1) Diana Gabaldon https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1659086907l/10964.SY75.jpg 2489796]. I hate it when they take a thoroughly modern Millie and insert them into a historical time.It felt like she was using an unnecessarily complicated language because “they spoke like that in the 19th century”, and was using a thesaurus way too much. English isn't my native language, but there were some words that cannot be used the way she used them. I also don't think a brougham is what she seems to think it is. Or a “dog cart”. I found it extremely irritating how Charlotte was supposed to be so smart but then make idiotic mistakes. Firstly, she should have gotten herself a proper education already when she was a child. She should have taught herself several languages if her parents had refused to get her a teacher. She could have “helped” her friends and acquaintances with their studies and exchanged favors or other things with their governess to get the education required. She could have discussed with the governesses to find out what was needed to become a headmistress. She could have researched the different routes to becoming an independent woman. She should have considered what would happen if her scheme failed, before running away from home. What would be needed? How difficult it would actually have been to get a job. She could have started applying for a job already when she was 15. She could have started writing to earn some money. And how come she didn't manage to save more than what she had? And why didn't she wait until she was sent to the countryside before she run away? I mean, I would have made an agreement with the driver about him taking me somewhere else - and I would have secured that “somewhere else” already in good time beforehand... I suppose I need to write my version of this to see if it was any better :-DAlso, the scheme she cooked up to force her parents to give her what she wanted was stupid. At that time, all she needed to do was to SAY she had had sex with someone. She didn't need to actually have sex with someone. Anyway, what made me finally decide not to continue reading was the passage about the relationship between Charlotte and the love interest. sigh I was fascinated by the idea of a young woman being Sherlock Holmes, having chosen the name as a male disguise, but... the name “Sherlock” is a surname, and not common enough for someone to think of it as their pseudonym. She could have chosen any name, John, Edward, Frederick, Oliver, even Charles. No one would have thought the little plumb Charlotte Holmes would be the brilliant detective.The mystery part of the book was somewhat interesting, even though it wasn't interesting enough for me to want to finish the book to find out the solution. I just don't care. I suppose Sherry Thomas was writing Charlotte as being on the Autistic spectrum (having Asperger's), people have been having theories about Sherlock Holmes being an Aspie. I can accept her description as someone on AS. Some of us function like that. I also appreciate the fact that Charlotte was a glutton and rotund. Though I'm thinking about Lily Langtry, the White Elephant, and that being fat wasn't in any way unattractive during the Victorian times.