A Letter of Mary: Mary Russell-Sherlock Holmes Series # 3

What would you think if you have lived in London in the 1920s, and heard news that the famous retired detective Sherlock Holmes has just married? ‘Awkward’ would be the first word pop up in my head. But interestingly, in A Letter of Mary, King has written it such that it seems normal—interesting but normal.

A female archeologist, Russell’s friend, visited the Holmes’ residence, and placed a small box containing an old papyrus under Russell’s care. It is believed to be a letter from the first century written by Mary Magdalene. Yep, it’s THE Mary Magdalene, the Saint. Few days later the Holmes found out that Ms. Ruskin has died in a hit-and-run accident in London. It turned out, of course, to be a murder. King develops several leads of suspects, including a sexist colonel who was disappointed that the archeologist he was about to sponsor was a woman; a Palestinian man who have visited Ruskin; and her nephew who would have had benefit from her death. Then a group of men ransacked Holmes and Russell’s house, and most probably wanted to get to the old papyrus. So Russell translated it (originally written in Hebrew), and found in it that Mary Magdalene has called herself the apostle of Jesus, which, if the letter was published in today’s world, would have huge impact, both historically and theologically.

[spoiler] Actually, the papyrus would have been an interesting point to dig on, and I have imagined some journeys to the east, tracing over historical facts, etc; but apparently King had another plan. In the end, it was just a usual lust-of-money kind of crime. [spoiler end] Again, there is the feminist theme all over the book (Mary Magdalene as Jesus’ apostle, Dorothy Ruskin the female archeologist among her male colleagues, and the misogyny Colonel and his son). However, concerning our detectives, King made Holmes won over Russell in solving this mystery. Maybe it was meant to be a balancing aspect against the feminism topic? And what about Russell’s feeling over the Colonel, considering his misogyny ideas? I think here in this story, Russell has fully grown up as a woman—she sees feminism not only as ideology, but the way a woman sees her opposite sex.

Speaking about feminism, one of the most interesting parts of this third book of Mary Russell-Holmes series is Russell-Holmes relationship—now as husband and wife. Russell said to Holmes that she thought they are not a romantic couple. But I disagree; I think they are romantic…in their own way. I think romantic isn’t about flowers, candle-lit dinner, etc. Romantic is when you know details about your partners; their habits, their likes and dislikes, their feelings and reaction over something; things you only share with your partners. And above all, they respect each other. Russell and Holmes are like this. I think the marriage life of two genius detectives with acute pride and high ego would be just like Russell and Holmes’s.

And sometimes there are indeed several ‘romantic’ scenes throughout the story. My favorite is when Holmes must leave Russell to her undercover at the Colonel’s house; and at the door before he left, he stopped, looked at Russell with unread expression, and said: “I feels like Abraham…”. This he refers to Abraham, when he took his family to Egypt, and told Sarah—his beautiful wife—to lie to Pharaoh that she was his sister, lest Pharaoh will kill him to take her as his wife. Isn’t it sweet? Or when Holmes confessed to Russell that now his heart controlled his mind (he was worried about Russell); to me that’s romantic—romantic in Sherlock Holmes style! :)

In short, this book might be my other favorite so far from the series, besides The Beekeeper Apprentice. Now, I can’t wait to read the fourth book, The Moor, which was set in Dartmoor, the setting of Doyle’s The Hound of the Baskervilles. Super interesting, eh? ;)

Four stars for A Letter of Mary, I liked and enjoyed the whole story. It’s been an oasis during the hectic month of December!

A Monstrous Regiment of Women: Mary Russell-Sherlock Holmes Series # 2

In one week Mary Russell would be 21 years, when she would inherit property and a lot of money. She is preparing an essay for her study in Oxford, and in boring mood she goes to London in search of her intimate friend, partner and mentor: Sherlock Holmes. On top of a hansom cab—one of Holmes’ disguises—Holmes tells her that he knows why she has searched for him; it is because she wants him to marry her. Mary is offended by this, and she runs away. In her confusion, she meets her friend from Oxford, Lady Veronica ‘Ronnie’ Beaconsfield, whom introduces her to The New Temple of God and its charismatic preacher Margery Childe.

Margery turns out to be a feminist, who in her preaches criticizes male preachers for impeding women to study and discuss religion; she believes that God created men and women equal. Russell is interested in Margery, and agrees to teach her about her research in theology, that God was also referred in feminine (not only masculine) in original bible manuscript. Then some events take place; from a mysterious murder of a rich woman from the inner circle of The New Temple of God, to Ronnie’s accident. Is Margery involved in all that? What she is after if it’s true? Or is it something else?

The second installment of Mary Russell series saw Mary Russell growing up to be a woman. Out of the criminal mystery, it is about how Russell became a woman in particularly the 1920s era. The sparks of attraction between Russell and Holmes, which has started in Beekeeper’s Apprentice, now reaches its momentum. I can feel how restless Russell is when she is separated from Holmes, but it gets even more intense whenever she is with Holmes. And I see the same thing in Holmes, he seems to lose his coolness more than before everytime Russell is in danger.

Apart from the mystery—which I don’t find very special—and the romance, this book is still interesting because of the religious and historical feminism aspect in 1920s. Many men had died during World War 1 and left their wives widows, but they who survived came home as different men. They became more savage after witnessing the cruelness at war, and many of them could not get jobs. These problems increased women’s involvement in the society. There were many social organizations focusing in women education, health care, and shelter, just like what Margery Childe in this story does.

King framed the feminism issue with theological discussion on women involvement on the bible. This is revealed in Margery and Russell’s discussion based on Russell’s major in Theology she studied at Oxford, about how God has actually been referred in Old Testament.

While speaking of feminism, I could not but thinking about Russell-Holmes’ partnership, which I believe a good example of what women should practice. There is equality in it, in terms of making decision and job description; and I like how Russell emphasizes this to Holmes on many occasions, and Holmes—despite being reluctant or just isn’t yet familiar with the idea—fully respects Russell’s initiatives. However, in some circumstances, where Russell is helpless and in danger, she puts trust in Holmes to save her. I disagree with a feminism-essay writer who was disappointed with the ending because Russell needs Holmes to help her. I believe the focus of feminism should be to get the same rights as men, not to be superior. God has created us equal, men and women, to become partners, because they have their uniqueness and thus could fill what lack in the partner. From the first series it has been clear that Russell and Holmes are made for partners, because only with both qualities, they could beat their enemies.

This second book is less entertaining, but more intriguing, so I think three and a half stars would be fair enough.

~~~~~~~

*I read the translation edition from Qanita (part of Mizan Publishing group)*

*I read this for:*

Laurie R. King Readalong – January 2014

The Beekeeper’s Apprentice: Mary Russell-Sherlock Holmes Series # 1

What do you think Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes detective stories lack of? I might say: a feminine aspect. Of course, Sherlock Holmes is very ‘masculine’ with his astounding logical reasoning talent. Most of his stories are about how to solve a complex mystery using logic, knowledge and some brave maneuvers. In short, it’s about brain and some muscles, which made it very masculine. But what about adding a small (just a small) portion of feminine touch in it? Wouldn’t it be interesting? Aren’t you wondering, how Holmes would react if he ever met a female who matches his talent? He has found one, Irene Adler, in Doyle’s stories, but she was his adversary and her appearance is less than sufficient to be paired with Holmes.

Now, Laurie R. King seems to know what few of us (including me!) have been wishing; she brings an orphanage Jewish-American teenage girl named Mary Russell to accidently meet the retired Holmes in a quiet little village of Sussex. Already passing the age of fifty, Holmes now busies himself with beekeeping when Mary Russell stumbles across him on a hill. At that instant Holmes realizes Russell’s rare intelligent brain, and decides to make her his apprentice as well as friend. When Russell does not go to Oxford to study theology and mathematic, she does her education and training with Holmes. During this apprenticeship, Russell and Holmes solve several cases, starting the partnership of their detective career.

Reading this book is immensely entertaining. The first book in the series acts as an introduction to Mary Russell’s personage—which I like instantly—and her apprenticeship with Holmes. It is of course quite awkward for Holmes—and for us too, who follow his actions in Doyle’s stories—to be in the friendly presence of a girl, but that actually makes this story more interesting. I always like characters from books that are presented humanly with emotion, and sometimes make mistakes. Holmes here seems to me more human, not a genius man-robot as Doyle wrote it.

Instead of writing another Holmes story; King writes how Holmes influences Mary Russell in her memoirs. It is how Russell sees Holmes from her point of view. Watson’s approach has been much influenced by his worshipping of Holmes’ genius talent, something that he doesn’t possess; but in Russell, she shares Holmes’ talents and that gives her a wider point of view of Holmes, because she can look at things beyond his genius brain. Or, is it simply because women can look deeper into men? :)

Besides the cases Russell and Holmes must solve—in fact they are not very interesting, except for the last one—King put more of her focus in building personal relationship between Russell and Holmes. And I must say that this is actually the most interesting part of this book. At their first meeting, Holmes even mistakenly think that Russell is a boy—which is not surprising, considering Holmes’ view on his opposite sex (and also because Russell dressed like a boy at that time). Before Russell entering his life, Holmes takes female as brainless creature. However, dealing with Russell forces him to make an exception; certain female actually HAS brain, and slowly but surely Holmes can see that Russell possesses a unique talent he had never seen before (except in himself).

It is also interesting to see Holmes’ way of accepting Russell into his life. He takes Russell as Russell, not as a female, by ignoring every aspect of her sex. It is simple at first, because Russell was 15 years old girl with boyish appearance at that time; but it becomes more complicated when she grows up to be a young woman. Then Holmes is forced to take her as a woman, and…really….it’s quite funny to see Holmes’ awkwardness with Russell feminine aspects, not mentioning that a man and a woman in the early 20^th century could not spend much time alone without creating scandals.

Anyway, time flows, and I can see that Russell-Holmes relationship is leading to a more affectionate one. The question is now, what kind of love they are sharing? As friends? Father and daughter? Or more intimate than that, as lovers? From Russell, it is more clearly, for she confesses that her love for Holmes is growing. But what about Holmes? One thing is clear, his sharpness is slowly fading. After a bombing that wounded him, Holmes is disturbed by two things. First, that he is facing an enemy who knows him very well while he doesn’t have any clue of  him/her. Second, that this time, his brilliant logic is beaten by his emotion. Knowing that Russell is now in danger, his instinct could not follow his brain; and although his brain instructs him to stay, he rushes to Russell’s apartment. And this is happened to Sherlock Holmes! Who would even guess? So, what else can change him like that if not the power of love? It becomes more interesting, eh?.....

Apart from the sparkle of romance, I was touched too by the struggles Russell and the child she rescued must have shared. It’s lovely to see how Russell could cure Jessica because of her own struggle, but more than that, I was glad and relieved that it is Holmes who helps Russell with his wisdom and experiences. When one blames oneself for a tragedy, people keep saying that it’s not his/her fault. It’s true, of course, but it doesn’t work to confront when one is wounded. Perhaps Holmes’ approach is the best way, to make one accepts that it’s one’s fault, but it’s all over now, it’s time to move on and do better things to pay for the fault already done. I just realize, that might be the best argument. And that makes me love Mary Russell’s series more, because it is very entertaining and exciting, yet sometimes touching.

So I guess, Russell and Holmes deserve to earn four stars from me for their first collaboration. Special thanks to Melisa who gave me this book for my birthday last year, and of course, a bunch of thanks for Laurie R. King for bringing Mary Russell into my life :) Now I can hardly wait to read the whole series!

~~~~~~~~

*I read Qanita translation edition in Bahasa Indonesia for:*

9^th book for 2013 TBR Pile Challenge

8^th book for New Authors Reading Challenge 2013

5^th book for 2013 TBRR Pile Mystery Reading Challenge