I'd previously read The Hound of the Baskervilles (1902), but it was ten years ago. I can't even remember the basic plot, so I probably need to read it again in time. These don't necessarily need to be read in order, but my neuroticism wouldn't leave me alone otherwise. So, let the mysteries of Victorian London begin!

Holmes is a damn interesting and alluring character, who now became one of my favourites. He's sarcastic, inquisitive, and enthusiastic about his scientific experiments. Holmes in general just wants to do his thing, without letting anyone's expectations distract him, and doesn't feel the need to share everything about himself. This mysteriousness of course bugs the hell out of Watson, especially when Watson's social life is completely frozen. So, he has to come up with something, like pondering what the hell Holmes is up to and what is he about.

At first Watson is highly suspicious of Holmes's amazing skills of perception, but finally humbles in front of his awesomeness. Holmes himself knows he's a good detective, and isn't shamed to say it aloud. Scotland Yard is just full of incompetent asses. This isn't particularly cocky, because the reader already knows by now that Holmes is unbeatable in crime solving. Watson may seem pointless storywise, but I liked him as the (sometimes painfully clueless) narrator, not as a character per se. Hopefully he doesn't turn into a mere ego booster, but then again I wouldn't mind if there were just me and Holmes.

Doyle's prose is by no mean remarkable, but I don't expect it to be in a crime story. Descriptions of London are pretty much nonexistent, but somehow I still felt like I was there. I guess it says something about the author's skills, although my edition had both 19th century photographs and illustrations to demonstrate the locations, plot points, and special Victorian objects and things to help set the mood.

The murder illustrates Holmes's theory about how even the weirdest and most complex crime is very simple, and the other way round. The sensationalist newspapers stir the case with all kinds of theories from socialism to political refugees, but the real motive turns out to be the age-old one, seen thousands of times before. However, it's so entertaining to follow the deductions, that simplicity doesn't matter, and actually the criminal evokes thoughts of what's right after all.

The structure was a major disappointment, though. Part one was great, but Part two had a flashback that lasted five chapters, and it interrupts the plot almost completely. The flashback does show the background of the characters that are involved in the case, but there's nothing that couldn't have been told in a smaller space. Now the flachback seems like a short story within a novel, and on top of it the style is completely different as well. The chapters after that are a bit boring, because the main points of the case are heard twice, although with different points of view. I do want to know what happened, of course, but not when there's excessive rambling. Maybe in the short stories the pacing is better, since the shortness demands getting to the point.