#Laurie R. King

[bangbangwhoa]

books I’ve read in 2024 📖 no. 029

The Lantern’s Dance by Laurie R. King

“Resentments, unsettled scores, and long-standing acrimony were one thing. What I had not anticipated was being met by the sound of a break-action shotgun snapping into place behind me.”

[sparklywaistcoat]

Am reading The Lantern's Dance, the latest Russell-and-Holmes by Laurie R. King, and am delighted to find that King has painted Holmes as being very respectful and courteous toward children. The child in question is Holmes's granddaughter, but still. It's very good to see.

[bargainsleuthbooks]

#TheBeekeepersApprentice #MaryRussellandSherlockHolmes #1) by #LaurieRKing #BookReview #SherlockHolmes #Pastiche

I've gone back to the beginning of one of my favorite #SherlockHolmes pastiche. #TheBeekeepersApprentice teams a young woman with the aging sleuth and it works well. #LaurieRKing #maryrussellandsherlockholmes #maryrussell #bookreview #audiobook

Long retired, Sherlock Holmes quietly pursues his study of honeybee behavior on the Sussex Downs. He never imagines he would encounter anyone whose intellect matched his own, much less an audacious teenage girl with a penchant for detection. Miss Mary Russell becomes Holmes’s pupil and quickly hones her talent for deduction, disguises and danger. But when an elusive villain enters the picture,…

[bakerstreetbabble]

Book review: The Art of Detection, Laurie R. King

A few years ago, I discovered Laurie R. King's Mary Russell series, about a brilliant young woman living on the Sussex Downs around the time of World War I, who meets the retired Sherlock Holmes, and becomes his apprentice. But Laurie King also writes contemporary crime novels, and one of those novels has a tie to Sherlock Holmes as well: The Art of Detection, a novel from the Kate Martinelli series.  I'm currently reading the novel for the second time, and it's quite enjoyable, especially for those who have an interest in Sherlock Holmes.  In the book, a body is discovered in a national park near San Francisco.  When detective Kate Martinelli is called to investigate, she and her partner discover that one floor of the victim's apartment is a detailed reproduction of the famous flat at 221B Baker Street, as it is described in Arthur Conan Doyle's stories.  It turns out that the victim is a member of a San Francisco Sherlock Holmes group, and a very serious collector of Holmes memorabilia, including a signed copy of the Beeton's Christmas Annual from 1887 (as all Sherlockians know, the debut of Sherlock Holmes).

As the mystery develops, the victim's activities involving his Holmesian interests are front and center.  So we are treated to a very interesting mystery novel that, rather than trying to continue the Holmes stories (as King's Mary Russell series does), deals with the nature of Sherlockian enthusiasts and collectors. As mystery stories go, it's not brilliant or anything, but it is entertaining, especially for the Sherlockian reader. Kate Martinelli is a reasonably well-written character with an interesting back story.  She's a lesbian who is raising her young daughter, the biological offspring of her domestic partner, who was injured in the spine and is confined to a wheelchair.  I've never been to San Francisco, but the author seems to do a fine job describing the city and its environs. Sherlockians will likely recognize the title of the novel as an homage to a reference in "The Adventure of the Abbey Grange," in which Holmes tells Watson: "...I propose to devote my declining years to the composition of a textbook which shall focus the whole art of detection into one volume."

The ebook I'm currently re-reading is borrowed from Amazon.com, via my local public library.  If you've never borrowed ebooks from your public library, I strongly recommend it.  It's quick and easy, and saves you having to locate a physical copy from a different library branch.

[velveteencryptid]

Okay, bear with me

Laurie R King, author of a looooong and ongoing series of books inspired by Sherlock Holmes, once said that she had to convince the Doyle estate that her books were not going to be bodice-rippers (my words not hers). They were very concerned about the reputation and vibes of Sherlock and wanted to ensure she would honor ACD and the original Sherlock appropriately (she does imo).

Now, let's talk about the TV show Elementary, specifically the pilot. It immediately sets the stage that Holmes and Watson - who is a woman this time - are meeting for the first time. With Watson being a woman, you could easily see people assuming this show is going to be about them falling in love. Most shows with a male + female leads do, after all.

Then, the first thing Sherlock Holmes says to Joan Watson is a couple sentences about being in love/love at first sight: "Do you believe in love at first sight? I know what you're thinking: the world is a cynical place, and I must be a cynical man, thinking a woman like you would fall for a line like that. Thing is, it isn't a line, so, please... hear me when I say this. I have never loved anyone as I do you right now, in this moment."

And Joan is shocked and confused. Understandably!

Then Sherlock hits play on the remote in his hand, and the TV starts playing right as a character says the EXACT speech he just gave. He gives a "nailed it" and finally introduces himself like normal.

It's funny AND sets a tone for his eccentricities, but I don't think that's why they did it. I think that scene went exactly like that to announce right out of the gate that this would not be a love story, there would be no sexual tension, Watson being female changes NOTHING.

And it didn't. And it was perfect. Not usually wholesome or beautiful, but perfect.

I don't really have a point here, just had to connect those two points after re-watching the pilot last night

[runilareads]

Mary Russell - Florence Pugh Sherlock Holmes - Paul McGann Dr. John Watson - Bradley Walsh Mycroft Holmes - Joe McGann Mrs. Hudson - Phoebe Nicholls Inspector Lestrade - Ed Speleers Patricia Donleavy - Tuppence Middleton

[genderfluidbf]

ok maybe i just have rose tinted glasses bc mary russell was recommended to me by a very beloved teacher, and i read it in the middle of my "i want to be and/or marry sherlock holmes" phase but like. the age gap doesnt bother me? it weirded me out when i heard abt it but i think laurie r king does a really good job of like, kind of bringing it abt in a way that doesnt seem creepy? like from what i remember, perhaps the timing is a bit abrupt but its mary who i think initiates and holmes is fighting it and honestly their relationship is so far from a typical romance story romance that its not creepy? like first and foremost i would say they are partners and friends and that love just kinda grew stronger until they decided they wanted to kiss about it???? idk maybe im crazy, can anyone who has read the series pls jump in bc i *need* to talk abt this to someone

[inamemyselficarus]

All Sherlock Holmes-es are good Sherlock Holmes-es, but I must confess that I've flown through the first 5 books of Laurie R. King's Russell and Holmes Series and I think I'm more than half in love with this one specifically.

[azazel-dreams]

Mary Russell's War by Laurie R King

Rating: ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️

The Mary Russell series in reading order:

The Beekeeper’s Apprentice 

A Monstrous Regiment of Women

A Letter of Mary

The Moor 

O Jerusalem 

Justice Hall 

The Game 

Locked Rooms 

The Language of Bees 

The God of the Hive 

Beekeeping for Beginners (novella)

Mrs Hudson’s Case (novella)

Pirate King 

Garment of Shadows 

Dreaming Spies 

Mary Russell's War (short stories)

The Marriage of Mary Russell (novella)

The Murder of Mary Russell

Island of the Mad 

Riviera Gold 

Castle Shade 

[scientistofdeduction]

I respect Sherlockians who Play the Game (live as though Sherlock Holmes and John Watson were real and treat the canon as true stories), and admire the commitment of those who hold to that no matter what. It’s a fun and very unique experience across all fandoms that I don’t see anywhere else.

But I did see a post about the Mary Russell and Sherlock Holmes series by Laurie R King (which is good fun though not without some stuff that does deserve questioning). In that thread, one of the comments was from David Marcum, who does the MX Publishing’s massive collections of Holmes stories and who is one of the more serious who Play the Game. He linked a post where he talked about how he rationalizes the series with The Game—specifically how can one rationalize a Holmes who is in retirement marrying a young woman in her twenties.

You can read it here

Basically what I find interesting is that Marcum firstly adheres to Holmes’ supposed age in the Game, making him in his very late 60s in most of the Russell years, instead of his early 50s as suits the story (Holmes remarks to Russell that he was often assumed to be older due to Watson’s stories). A woman in her 20s with a man in her 50s will still raise eyebrows, especially as he met her as a teenager, and yet that’s not the same gap as 70 and 20. Likewise Russell has gone through a lot of life experience by the time any romantic moves are made; her and Holmes are on fairly even footing by then. (Do I still approve of the age gap? No, but then again maybe that’s just my personal preference.

But my bigger qualm with Marcum’s rationalizing the Russell thrillers within The Game is how he rationalizes it all. Russell is a woman who is sick in the head after her family’s death, becomes obsessive over Holmes (fairly directly in opposite to the text where she doesn’t care if he’s a neighbor or a myth, and berates him to his face for assuming her intelligence—point in her favor, I might add), and further descends into madness creating a romance between them in her mind, a life well lived with family.

Here’s hoping I’m not the only one who is a little disturbed by this—yes, the way to rationalize an intelligent woman holding her own with Holmes intellectually, romantically, and as a crime solver, is that she’s insane and disturbed and creepy. Yuck.

He notes that he’s on board with Holmes having romance with Irene Adler, which is fairly bonkers to me. I can read stories where they’ve had a romance, in fact, if memory serves, the two had something brief pre-Russell era in that canon. But I do not like the idea that Holmes cannot be romantic with a “fan made” character. An argument can be made that many Dan made characters are Mary Sues, or John Does, for Watson, as many find the good Doctor difficult to write (and I agree, he is, but that doesn’t always warrant a stand in when Watson would’ve suited the same character actions). But it’s strange that when the newcomer is a woman, she’s hated or interrogated so thoroughly, especially when Mary Russell is so strong a presence and definitely holds her own as a unique character and not just a stand in (even if Watson is a bit dim in her stories compared to canon, we can forgive that because he is so loved by everyone in the Russell texts).

Instead, if I were playing The Game, i would submit this (and I plan on writing a fic to challenge Marcum’s own little story):

Russell is the neighbor of semi-retired Holmes and their meeting is unchanged, he begins to tutor her and saves her in his own way, and she him. The events of Beekeepers and O Jerusalem take place fairly close to recorded, save a few alterations.

Holmes in retirement is living with Watson, as a romantic partnership. Russell discovers this early and although taken aback at first, comes around to it quickly. She creates the stories as fabrications to hide their romance, and with permission from H&W, creates the romantic relationship on paper between her and Holmes to disguise what would’ve been illegal and perhaps reputation ruining for the pair.

The three remain their own sort of family and the series progresses as published to continue that fabrication of the truth.

No mentally disturbed Russell, but a Russell who’s still strong and sane and perhaps at times cleverer than Holmes. No creepy stalker behavior by a girl, but the same in canon amazing woman we get to see grow up. Same partnership, just no romance.

I wonder if this solution wouldn’t occur to a canon purist who plays the game— a purist up until the point where they play a game of rationalizing a non-canonical work to fit their version of Holmes. Not saying that to be scathing, just if one is to entertain the possibility of modern pastiche fitting into The Game, it would be fun to be a little more creative.

I wonder if queer H&W doesn’t slot into their version of the game, and so a clever woman protecting that deep love wouldn’t either. But it seems a far better solution to approach the Russell texts under The Game than Marcum’s rationalization. Again, I’d want for some more creativity than his version.

But then, My Holmes, when I finally write him, is queer, and I enjoyed the Russell series, so it wasn’t a difficult solution.

[sparklywaistcoat]

Always satisfying when you figure out a major plot twist in a Russell-and-Holmes adventure some twenty pages before Russell even has a glimmer of what it's all about.

[bargainsleuthbooks]

Back to the Garden by #LaurieRKing + $1.99 on Kindle + Book Review #NetGalley #ARCReview #PoliceProcedural #HistoricalFiction #Mystery #BookReview

Great #policeprocedural on sale on #Kindle right now from one of my favorite authors, #LaurieRKing. #BacktotheGarden is an excellent dual timeline mystery. Get it now! Link in the bio. #kindledeals #bookreview #bookstagram #instabooks #historicalfiction

Right now, you can snag this book on Kindle for only $1.99. Book review and link to sale below! From Goodreads: “A magnificent house, vast formal gardens, a golden family that shaped California, and a colorful past filled with now-famous artists: the Gardener Estate was a twentieth-century Eden. And now, just as the Estate is preparing to move into a new future, restoration work on some of its…

[02subaruoutback]

i love laurie r king for the kate martinelli books but i’ll never forgive her for making sherlock holmes not only straight but a straight up pedophile

[mabhsavage]

Currently reading the Mary Russell stories, reasonably non-sexist Holmes since the 1990s. (Mind you he has his moments!)

Happy “Sherlock Holmes Can Legally Be Nice To Women,” day to all those who celebrate.

[runilareads]

Book Review: The Beekeeper's Apprentice by Laurie R. King (Mary Russell & Sherlock Holmes, 1)

Title: The Beekeeper's Apprentice Author: Laurie R. King Series: Mary Russell & Sherlock Holmes, 1 Release Date: January 1994 Publisher: Bantam Rating: 4 stars

Favourite character: Sherlock Holmes Least favourite character: N/A (spoiler reasons)

Mini-Review: I enjoyed this, although I'd say it's definitely on the medium to slow side with pacing. The writing was beautiful and I loved the characters, but I did find certain parts to almost be reminiscent of grooming. Different times, but this was still written in the 90s so just be aware of that if you plan on reading it.

Fan Cast: Mary Russell - Florence Pugh Sherlock Holmes - Paul McGann Dr. John Watson - Bradley Walsh Mycroft Holmes - Joe McGann Mrs. Hudson - Phoebe Nicholls Inspector Lestrade - Ed Speleers Patricia Donleavy - Tuppence Middleton

[genderfluidbf]

the beekeeper's apprentice: mary russell book one

synopsis (via goodreads): Long retired, Sherlock Holmes quietly pursues his study of honeybee behavior on the Sussex Downs. He never imagines he would encounter anyone whose intellect matched his own, much less an audacious teenage girl with a penchant for detection. Miss Mary Russell becomes Holmes's pupil and quickly hones her talent for deduction, disguises and danger. But when an elusive villain enters the picture, their partnership is put to a real test.

rating before reread: ★★★★★

rating after reread: ★★★★

general thoughts: i have changed as a person since i last read this! i am no longer the pretentious middle schooler so deeply enamoured by holmes and russell's deductive skills. instead, i think, i favor the growth of their relationship and trust in one another.

laurie r king's writing style for this series is honestly immaculate. she has successfully infiltrated the mind of mary russell. its a period piece told from the perspective of a young woman, and shes managed to capture that spirit through her descriptions.

i take off a star however, for repeated rereads. its never going to compare to the first time i read it. its hard to say anything abt the cleverness, for me, when i already know whats gonna happen.

spoilers under the cut!!

firstly i suppose i gotta talk abt the relationship between holmes and russell. gotta say, i love it? but in later books the foundation we've laid here takes a bit of a sinister tinge. for now tho, i love it.

they save each other!!!!! its directly talked abt in the book but to paraphrase, russell saves holmes from dying of boredom, and holmes saves russell from becoming a worse version of her aunt.

they provide each other companionship and a whetstone to hone their minds against. say what u will, but sherlock holmes needs someone to go up against, who can be an equal to him and put him in his place if need be.

laurie r king describes their playact of a falling out in this way: "Holmes and I had only a few days to perfect our rôles of the two friends now turned against each other, the father and daughter alienated, the near-lovers become bitterest, most implacable of enemies"

if i am to criticize one thing in this book, it is their weird relationship. she is 15 when they meet, and he is like, definitely in his 60s. as a middle schooler i was quick to justify and defend my hero, sherlock holmes, but now i find it hard to not feel a little uneasy. i will say tho, the way laurie r king writes their relationship helps to assuage my concerns. it doesnt feel predatory.

anyways, onto mrs. hudson and dr. watson. some say watson is portrayed poorly here. i think it can go either way. those who want all of their characters to be smart and capable in all ways see watson diminished into a bumbling fool. i think tho that watson is aptly characterized, if we're basing it off of the original stories. he is fiercely loyal, an excellent doctor, and, quite frankly, incapable of pulling off some of the more delicate schemes needed to be on the level of sherlock holmes. yes, he is written to be a bit of a fool, but not i would think in a malicious way. he has a big heart, and many other wonderful qualities. he is not, however, capable of disguising himself and losing a tail.

mrs. hudson is a girlboss.

the daughter of moriarty being the villain is perhaps a bit trite? but perhaps thats also why its clever. u dont expect it. moriarty is dead, this is not connected to the original stories, and in the original stories i dont believe theres a mention of his family.

its late, and im getting tired, and i am quite certain no one will read this, so i will end my nonsensical babbling here.