Oh dear....

Is a little Canon knowledge too much to ask?

This is taken from a certain popular Facebook Sherlock page re the BBC's imminent (re)release of two original Sherlock Holmes story collections from which two of the episodes of Sherlock series three are drawing their inspiration.

I stick to my statement that all fans at all levels are entitled to term themselves Sherlockians but I do think that this shows an extreme (but hopefully rare) example of how some new adherants are lacking in knowledge as to where their favourite show has its roots.

Written by Alistair Duncan
Buy my books here


  1. I do find it recommendable of Moffat/Gatiss that they refused to let print tie-ins of their show be produced and instead endeavour to lead the fans back to the original. However, I think the make up of the newly issued edition is confusing/misleading.

  2. One cannot fault a fan of the BBC's "Sherlock" seeing these reissues in a bookstore or online and seeing Cumberbatch and Freeman on the cover and Moffat and Gatiss' names in larger and brighter print and thinking that the books are novelizations of the show. I hope that the Facebook poster will read the books and discover and enjoy Doyle's originals.

  3. I disagree. On their own those things could be confusing but given that the titles on the cover are clearly different from those advertised as being the episode names I don't think it's totally excusable for a Sherlock fan to get quite that confused.