Review: The Sign of the Four – Arthur Conan Doyle

The Sign of the Four – Arthur Conan Doyle

If you follow the link above to the Amazon page where you can buy this book in its Penguin Classic format, you’ll notice that book is listed under the title ‘The Sign of Four’. This should tell you all you need to know about this book. That the title can’t be universally agreed upon would usually be a good indicator that there’s no particular affection for it. The Amazon reviews, however, imply otherwise. Strange.

In my unrefined view, it’s a by-the-numbers detective story, with a healthy dollop of plot over-complication, and just a soupçon of Basil Exposition-esque thirty-pages-too-many at the end. Yes, it introduces the important character of Mary Morstan, Watson’s future wife, and yes, we get further example of Holmes’ brilliant deduction, but I had trouble maintaining interest for the entirety of the novel. And was it only me who was disappointed by the seeming cop-out of using a dog to do some detective heavy-lifting, half way through? Whilst Holmes professes that there are multiple ways to track the suspect in question, and the dog just happens to be the quickest, we’re never told what these other ways are, and I came away feeling a little short-changed.

And yes, I’ll say it, I found this book a bit boring. With no uncertainty in Holmes’ analysis, the process is very linear. There’s no trial and error; it’s always A to B to C and there’s the bad guy. I realise that’s the essence of Holmes, but it can make for unexciting reading.

But anyway, the Amazon reviewers all love it, so I’m obviously in the wrong. One positive I have taken away from the two novels so far is the relationship between Holmes and Watson. My main education in Holmes thus far has been the BBC show, and the Guy Ritchie movies. In the former, Holmes comes across as quite the dick most of the time, especially in his interactions with Watson. In the latter, the relationship is played with a more ‘buddy cop’ vibe. It’s pleasing to find the novels portraying the relationship as somewhere between those two – Holmes is a master at his craft and doesn’t suffer fools gladly (indeed, he treats substandard detectives somewhat mockingly), but he doesn’t seem to extend that douchebag behaviour to Watson. He never seems to get exasperated at Watson for not following the seemingly logical set of steps he took to reach a particular conclusion, and sometimes takes time to explain his reasoning (to us, in reality, via the medium of Watson). Additionally, there are knowing glances and in-comments between the two protagonists that Guy Ritchie has seemingly latched on to and exaggerated to form the basis of the relationship between his Holmes and Watson, no doubt to play to the strengths of his actors. Maybe.

Anyway, I think I’m going to have to tap the short stories next in my Holmes mission, as I can’t endure any more long-form disappointment right now. Onward and upward…