The Affair of the Mysterious Letter

My favorites list here is very long and also pretty idiosyncratic. But this book is something else. I really enjoyed it, but beyond that, it gave me the rare feeling of encountering something that felt like a piece of myself. It's very hard to put this feeling into words. I don't mean it as an endorsement of the book's quality or even as a comment on my own enjoyment of it. But over the years, as I've watched TV shows, played games, read books, etc., I've often felt, “I like this a lot, but I would like it more if there were queer characters, or if the humor was sillier, or if there was (or wasn't) a romance,” and so on. I had none of those thoughts about this book. The humor is absurd, every major character is queer, and the (low) romance content is perfect. Even though there was a section I didn't love (the visit to Carcosa), I could see how it worked as part of the whole. So, just in terms of my own preferences, I wouldn't change anything. I don't get this feeling often, even though I enthusiastically enjoy a lot of books; the last book I felt this way about was [b:The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet 22733729 The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet (Wayfarers, #1) Becky Chambers https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1405532474i/22733729.SY75.jpg 42270825]. These two books are very different, but they do have something major in common, which is that they're both episodic in nature. But there's really only one point-of-view character in this book, John, except for one chapter, so it isn't a multi-person character study. Instead, the investigation feels like a trip around the bizarre world John lives in, and it's almost all wonderful. I know there were a lot of references to other works that I didn't pick up on; I'm pretty familiar with the original Sherlock Holmes stories, but otherwise, I've never read much 19th-century fiction. But I didn't feel like I was missing out on anything.But wow, I loved John Wyndham, even though I really can't think of a character I have less in common with, in a superficial sense. Although he is a gay trans man, he hasn't rejected his strict religious upbringing in any way except what was necessary to live as himself. He doesn't swear, he prefers not to eat dessert, he thinks paisley is garish, and he's appalled at the idea of spending a (chaste) night with someone he's not married to. He's also brave and noble to a fault. I signed my soul over to him about halfway through the book, even though I know a gesture like that would offend his sensibilities too.I love the style of the book, too. I'm sure every sentence was carefully crafted, but it gave the illusion of being indulgent and verbose. It's like no word that would fit was left out. I never felt like anything was under-explained or under-described. I know a lot of readers prefer just the opposite style of writing, so I guess this is one of those details in a positive review that might drive people away from a book. The chapters themselves are very short, if that changes your mind! In a few ways, this book also reminded me of [b:The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy 386162 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, #1) Douglas Adams https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1559986152i/386162.SX50.jpg 3078186]. Like Arthur Dent, John Wyndham is disoriented in a strange environment, while spending all his time with Ms. Haas, who knows (or pretends to know) pretty much everything. But this is a much more character-driven book. Mostly, I thought of Hitchhiker's Guide because there are digressions and references to in-universe books, etc., as well as a lot of humor, and wildly creative concepts.I would call this an adventure novel with a mystery. Neither main character has a romance plot; there are only some mentions of John's future husband, and some flirting that seems like it might continue in a future book. John and Shaharazad both have sex (with other people), but it isn't explicit. As much as I've shipped other versions of Holmes & Watson, I think I do prefer it when they're friends with nothing romantic or sexual between them. I found the resolution of the mystery (this is only a mild spoiler) both completely unexpected and very satisfying.I listened to the audiobook, narrated by Nicholas Boulton (it was my first time listening to one of his narrations, and he was excellent) and also read the text, which was a very good experience. I really hope there will be more books because I need to know who John married: the sweet little necromancer or the gruff but kindly detective? I was cheering for the necromancer, but we didn't see too much of him. Or maybe it's someone else! I also thought there would be more of a resolution of the conflict between John and the Eyan myrmidon, but maybe that will happen in a future book.

DNF - PG 33

Why?

Because I really, really dislike this book.

I didn't really do a lot of research on this book before borrowing it. Basically, I heard ‘queer' and ‘Sherlock Holmes' in the same sentence and I was there. I started reading the book and had immediate whiplash as I expected a pretty standard quasi-historical and didn't realize that it was a strange Lovecraftian fantasy/sci-fi amalgamation. I was immediately excited. Perhaps too excited, as this story doesn't excel in the weird and wonderful, but in the stodgy and mundane ala ‘my editor tells me to info dump here as some of my readers might not be from the same interdimensional nexus of crazy as I am so I'd better give you page upon page of words without actually saying anything.'

I tried sticking around long enough to be introduced to the wacky and wild wide world - but my blasé feelings towards Wyndham (that could, admittedly, turn to hatred very easily) and my absolute disdain and disgust of Haas conspired against me. (Why force myself to read a book I'm not enjoying when my only reward is more of the same?)

Haas is irrational and absurd in her reactions (no, don't great a guest in just a dressing gown, add a single earring to be presentable) and homicidal in in her actions. (“I know of three people you have personally murdered, one you drove to madness for slighting you, six you left to die in the ash wastes of Telash-Ur, and at least four you fed to the Princes of the Mocking Realm.”)

This is not a character I want to read about.

(Especially not when Wyndham's reaction to this is: ‘I can only say that I have never made excuses for my friend's behavior and do, on some level, know that she has done heinous things. But I have also never known her to act without purpose nor with wanton malice, and I believe I must have understood this fact even then.'

...

“I know of [...], one [person] you drove to madness for slighting you, [...].”

‘[...]I have also never known her to act [...] with wanton malice[...].'

I'm out.)

Related, this is the second time I tried a Hall book and the second time I dnf'd a Hall book after less that 40 pages. I think I have to face the fact that this is not an author for me.