You know the twist.You wouldn't be here if you didn't.But for the handful of readers who stumble here, innocent to the gory ways of the world, we'll ignore the twist in the room no matter how much Alfred Hitchcock and Rod Serling may stare at it jealously. Dibdin is the first to make a certain twist work. This will, perhaps, be his lasting memorial. But I say nothing more.This is, of course, one of innumerable stories pitting Sherlock Holmes against Jack the Ripper. More pour forth from pens every year, and it has bred into a subgenre within a subgenre within a subgenre. Despite that, and despite the shock of the twist, it remains one of the most successful. There's no need to rehash the plot: Jack the Ripper begins his spree and Holmes investigates. It is the same plot seen here and elsewhere and hither.What this book also does well, and does very well, is A) research into Victorian London and B) failing to give in to the fallacy of a first person account written like a novel. It is very much a memoir, and a painfully written one at that. We can hear Watson, and we can hear his pain.What doesn't the book do well? You may expect me to say "Sherlock Holmes," but Dibdin's handling of the Master Detective is perfectly canonical--to a point--and where he departs, the departure is perfectly reasonable. Where Dibdin fails in every attempt he makes to characterize Watson. It's difficult enough to believe he engaged prostitutes during his student days; it's impossible to believe he would defend this as "essentially innocent." Moreover, the climax is an under-developed mess. We have just enough data and detail for it to work, but not nearly as much data and detail as the emotions deserve.Should you read The Last Sherlock Holmes Story (particularly if, like me, you've put it off for ages for the obvious reason)? Yes. Unreservedly yes. If you can handle clinical descriptions of what the Ripper did--all, except for one point, historically accurate--then you should certainly read the book. Even if you disagree with his conclusions about Sherlock Holmes--as I do--everything involving Holmes and the Ripper prior to that point makes this the finest and most intriguing of this sub-sub-subgenre. Simply stop reading shortly prior to the death of Mary Jane Kelly. What occurs prior to that is simply excellent.
I wasnt quite sure what is my feeling about this book. YES! I DO LOVE HOLMES. After i finished this book, my first thought was like what the hell! Dibdin just completely destroyed my holmes. But at the same time, i think he is kinda great writer. Considering the writing itself, i found it's quite enjoyable. Holmes met Jact the Ripper and then what? Holmes met Moriaty an then what? I just couldnt put my hands off the book ( i finished it like 2-3 hours). It almost a good book until i read the last 2-3 chapters. I was frustrated by the way Watson kept suspecious Holmes. I mean he's Holmes' bestfried for many years. Dibdin wrote as if he never trust in Holmes. He didnt see it with his own eyes nor did he had such a strong evidence to conclude that Holmes....( i dont want to spoil) and the Reichenbach Fall! well, i know we all felt the same. All in all, i was slightly admire Dindin for that twist ( who can think of that!) but....i dont know the ending just made me as mad as his Holmes.
Do You like book The Last Sherlock Holmes Story (1995)?
An extremely clever take on the whole Holmes v/s Ripper concept, with a twist-ending that will take your breath away! I know, it reads like those blurbs that we get to read on paperbacks ('The cover will show you somebody shot/the back will tell you what is the plot'!), but that is the most succint description of this book that I can produce without producing spoilers en masse! Read it, curse Michael Dibdin to the core (the guy is dead, so really can't effect any harm), and then keep thinking: what if.... Recommended reading for stormy & foggy nights, when you are waiting for your family to return home, and the road is getting more & more deserted!
—Riju Ganguly
Although written in a style that reflects the original writings, I have to say, just didn't like this book because of the terrible way it made Sherlock Holmes appear. It was a twist that was obvious early in the book and it was sad that the author had to take Holmes and make him the killer. What is wrong with having heroes that are good? Why does it seem that if there is a twist, the good guy has to turn out to the be the evil one? With the way things are in the world, it would be nice to keep o
—Annette
I had to take a few days to think about this one for a little bit -- and to decide exactly what my rating for it would be.This was my second read in my "Holmes vs. Jack the Ripper" reading project, after Lyndsay Faye's seriously remarkable "Dust and Shadow." As I said in my "Dust and Shadow" review, Faye's book was so good that it really set the mark by which I knew I'd be measuring all other Holmes-vs.-Ripper stories that followed, and I don't expect any others to ever top her efforts. I was in
—Rose
