The Immersion Library

Darkly the shadow lay upon the Valley of Fear. The spring had come with running brooks and blossoming trees. There was hope for all Nature bound so long in an iron grip; but nowehere was there any hope for the men and women who lived under the yoke of terror.

Two for one! I enjoyed The Valley of Fear, even though it strays from the typical pattern of a Sherlock Holmes story and, like in The Hound of the Baskervilles, fails to include Sherlock Holmes for much of it.

This story keeps the reader wondering about the potential resolutions. I think part of this success comes from the narrative structure despite its seemingly cheap way of extending the book. After all, if Doyle would have ended the novel after Part 1, I don’t think we’d necessarily lose anything. But by adding Part 2, we gain a prequel and more of Moriarty’s oppressive omnipresence.

Part 1 runs much like Holmes’ other stories, though it seems that Doyle provides Holmes with more estute peers. Or he checks his ego. Are the agencies at large learning from Holmes? Perhaps. Also, the reader forms a negative attitude towards the innocent and, finally, Doyle vindicates them in a way that, at the time, never would have occured as plausible to the reader. Doyle then embarks on Part 2, a recounting of the secret society from which Douglas hails. Until now, we haven’t read anything during which Watson himself was not present and we wonder how he knows of the history. We also miss Holmes. With these deviations, Doyle runs the risk of estranging the reader. But, impressively, one learns not to mind and spends most of the second part wondering which character is Douglas! I figured it out before the reveal but, even then, had to keep reading to see if I was right!

The story does feel different so I can undertand why Sherklock Holmes super-fans may not enjoy it as much. In the first part, he seems a less egotistical or disdainful character and therefore less entertaining. He disappears entirely from the second part and the reader must learn to abide by a third-person omniscient narrator rather than the intimate storytelling of Dr. Watson. But as to Doyle’s ability to spin an intriguing mystery, without his main attractions, I commend him.