![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
That's one cold bastard
Apr. 19th, 2004 09:06 pmAlright, I've just started reading The Game (yay for libraries); I've actually had it for a few days, but for some reason I didn't immediately jump onto it. In any case, I'm only far enough in for the plot to still be exposition, and Holmes starts explaining what led him to the three year Hiatus. He says that his explanation to Watson about finishing up with the Moriarty gang was false -- so, I think, 'Hmmm... I'm wondering what the real reason was. It must have been important to MAKE YOUR BEST FRIEND IN THE WORLD THINK YOU WERE DEAD FOR THREE YEARS. SO here's what he says:
Once at the top, setting my face to the East, I paused. In fact, I sat among the bushes and stones for so long, I saw Watson reappear in a panic on the path below me. I saw the poor fellow find the note I had left there, saw him... He wept, Russell; my loyal friend broke down and wept, and it was all I could do not to stand and hail him. But I was silent, not because I wished to cause him pain, nor even because I had a thought out plan of action. No, it was merely that I had been given the priceless gift of choice, and could not bring myself to throw it away.
I'm sorry, but... WHAT THE HELL IS THAT??? You don't tell Watson you're alive because you feel like it? That's worse than Doyle's explanation!! MUCH WORSE!
Well, the only other people on my friends list who will care about this exchange have already read this book, so tell me (without spoilers -- I am still on page 26) what you think of this. Holmes doesn't even sound sad, or chagrined, when he says this -- and Russell didn't have what I would call a normal reaction either (i.e., ANY reaction). Is Laurie R. King trying to show us HOW MUCH of an asshole Holmes was back in the day? Is she just saying, "Oh, that Holmes -- he's so zany! You never know what he'll do next!" Or does this have to do with King's overall low opinion of Watson?
Once at the top, setting my face to the East, I paused. In fact, I sat among the bushes and stones for so long, I saw Watson reappear in a panic on the path below me. I saw the poor fellow find the note I had left there, saw him... He wept, Russell; my loyal friend broke down and wept, and it was all I could do not to stand and hail him. But I was silent, not because I wished to cause him pain, nor even because I had a thought out plan of action. No, it was merely that I had been given the priceless gift of choice, and could not bring myself to throw it away.
I'm sorry, but... WHAT THE HELL IS THAT??? You don't tell Watson you're alive because you feel like it? That's worse than Doyle's explanation!! MUCH WORSE!
Well, the only other people on my friends list who will care about this exchange have already read this book, so tell me (without spoilers -- I am still on page 26) what you think of this. Holmes doesn't even sound sad, or chagrined, when he says this -- and Russell didn't have what I would call a normal reaction either (i.e., ANY reaction). Is Laurie R. King trying to show us HOW MUCH of an asshole Holmes was back in the day? Is she just saying, "Oh, that Holmes -- he's so zany! You never know what he'll do next!" Or does this have to do with King's overall low opinion of Watson?
