![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Apr. 1st, 2006 03:59 pmA Letter Of Mary, Laurie R. King. If one is going to sandwich both Peter Wimsey and J.R.R. Tolkien into a work of fiction*, one had better be a writer good enough that the reader doesn't notice until several pages later, or ideally some time after closing the covers of the book. Also much Mary Sue-Russell, the most of any of the series that I've read, and very little actual ratiocination involved in the mystery part. Amusing, but I shan't re-read it any time soon. Will carry on reading the series, though.
The author sent Watson to the US to get him off-stage, which argues that she's read and is referring to the Baring-Gould biography, for which I can forgive much.
* all right, into a work of fiction which does not carry explicit labels for meta-narrative, such as being by Jasper Fforde, labelled AU or cross-over, or treating the Sherlock Holmes canon as fact. I am ignoring the last because... well, because Laurie R. King wasn't quite good enough at the time she wrote the book. I have never claimed to be fair.
The author sent Watson to the US to get him off-stage, which argues that she's read and is referring to the Baring-Gould biography, for which I can forgive much.
* all right, into a work of fiction which does not carry explicit labels for meta-narrative, such as being by Jasper Fforde, labelled AU or cross-over, or treating the Sherlock Holmes canon as fact. I am ignoring the last because... well, because Laurie R. King wasn't quite good enough at the time she wrote the book. I have never claimed to be fair.
