A Study in Terror

Ellery Queen Detective #30

by Ellery Queen

Book by Queen, Ellery

Genres: Mystery, Fiction, Crime, Thriller, Detective, Mystery Thriller, Horror

192 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1966

About the author

aka Barnaby Ross.
(Pseudonym of Frederic Dannay and Manfred Bennington Lee)
"Ellery Queen" was a pen name created and shared by two cousins, Frederic Dannay (1905-1982) and Manfred B. Lee (1905-1971), as well as the name of their most famous detective. Born in Brooklyn, they spent forty two years writing, editing, and anthologizing under the name, gaining a reputation as the foremost American authors of the Golden Age "fair play" mystery.

Although eventually famous on television and radio, Queen's first appearance came in 1928 when the cousins won a mystery-writing contest with the book that would eventually be published as The Roman Hat Mystery. Their character was an amateur detective who used his spare time to assist his police inspector father in solving baffling crimes. Besides writing the Queen novels, Dannay and Lee cofounded Ellery Queen's Mystery Magazine, one of the most influential crime publications of all time. Although Dannay outlived his cousin by nine years, he retired Queen upon Lee's death.

Several of the later "Ellery Queen" books were written by other authors, including Jack Vance, Avram Davidson, and Theodore Sturgeon.

Reviews

[Ria · Rating 2 out of 5]

haven't seen the movie and never will ✌🏻

[Michael P. · Rating 1 out of 5]

Look, this is a novelization of a movie that I really love. It stars the great John Neville in his first rendition of Sherlock Holmes and it very much feels like a Hammer film, thought it is not. No less than the writing duo that make up Ellery Queen undertook the novelization, and they botched it.

One problem, and this is true for most novelizations, is that there was not enough script for a full-length book. Most authors pad the stories. Frederic Dannay and Manfred Bennington Lee pad the story in an unusual way. Chapters of the (supposed) previously unpublished manuscript by Dr. Watson alternate with chapters of Ellery Queen commenting on the story to his father. When the novelization is done, the Queen story still has a bit to go and that bit goes too far. Ellery Queen declares that Holmes was wrong and supplies the "real" solution.

My reading of this, and it is hard to supply another that is convincing, is that Dannay and Lee insulted the film, its fans, and the very concept of Sherlock Holmes in order to declare the superiority of their creation.

What a pair of egos! F- them, quite frankly. This is a book for fans of Dannay's and Lee's turgid writing. Holmes fans can safely avoid it.

[Luis Minski · Rating 5 out of 5]

De vez en cuando ocurre que los grandes clásicos literarios , - y en una clara muestra de por qué son clásicos - , son recreados por otros autores.
En este caso, Ellery Queen, o más precisamente los autores que firman tras su seudónimo, nos cuenta una historia cuyos protagonistas son dos de las figuras más icónicas del ámbito criminal en la Londres victoriana: Sherlock Holmes, - por supuesto, acompañado por su fiel ayudante y cronista, el Dr Watson - , y Jack el Destripador.
La trama comienza cuando Ellery, el afable detective aficionado recibe , de un remitente anónimo, un sorprendente manuscrito inédito donde Watson relata los sucesos que llevaron a que Holmes pusiera fin a los crímenes del famoso asesino de Witechapel.
Así, se adentra en la lectura del relato, para, finalmente, lograr averiguar quién le envió el manuscrito y por qué éste nunca vio la luz.
Se trata, entonces, de una novela dentro de otra, - construcción que resulta verosímil - , muy entretenida, y donde se recrea el estilo, el tono y la impronta que Conan Doyle dió a su prosa y a sus personajes.
En definitiva una muy buena opción de lectura que nos trae de vuelta al detective más famoso y que, seguramente, todos los amantes del género, disfrutarán.
https://sobrevolandolecturas.blogspot...

[Mizuki · Rating 3 out of 5]

Ellery Queen took on Jack the Ripper and Sherlock Holme all at once! Well, I didn't have much high hope for this novella and in the end, it isn't very exciting..........the whole thing is decent but I'm not gonna go gaga over it. 2.9 stars only.

[Melody.readmeabook · Rating 3 out of 5]

3,5⭐️

Datemi Sherlock Holmes in tutte le possibili salse e io ne farò volentieri indigestione.
Ho iniziato bene il 2023 con questo libro che si legge che è un piacere. Purtroppo il mio sesto senso mi aveva già dichiarato il finale dopo solo 10 pagine ma poco importa. L’ho divorato e mi sono molto divertita a ritrovare il mio detective preferito. Non avevo mai letto nulla dei cugini Frederick Dannay e Manfred Bennington Lee ma devo dire che hanno catturato la mia attenzione e molto probabilmente continuerò a leggere i loro romanzi.
Sicuramente un buon inizio. Speriamo che sia di buon auspicio.

[Niki · Rating 2 out of 5]

novelization of movie of the same title - interesting, but not really original

[Anna [Floanne] · Rating 3 out of 5]

Un giallo che, come si capisce già dal titolo, vuol essere un tributo al genio di Conan Doyle e al suo celebre inimitabile Sherlock Holmes. Lo scrittore-detective Ellery Queen si ritrova misteriosamente per le mani un vecchio manoscritto di Watson in cui vengono narrate le indagini e i fatti che portarono il celebre investigatore inglese alla cattura di Jack lo squartatore. Da subito si capisce che le cose non andarono realmente come raccontate nel taccuino del fedele compagno di Holmes e, a distanza di quasi un secolo, Queen è chiamato a far riemergere la verità. Mi è piaciuta la scelta di alternare i capitoli in due piani temporali diversi, facendo sì che il lettore salti dalla New York degli anni ‘60 alla buia e nebbiosa Londra del 1888, seguendo il mostro per le vie di Whitechapel. Anche lo stile narrativo segue il salto temporale, cercando di imitare al meglio quello di Conan Doyle nelle pagine del taccuino, e resettandosi poi su uno stile più moderno quando si ritorna nell’appartamenti di Queen. Inizialmente la trama mi è apparsa subito intrigante e ben congegnata. Il finale però scade un po’.

[Riju Ganguly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book has been so widely discussed and read that there seems to be hardly anything new that can be added, except my strictly personal opinions, which are: -
1. The Victorian part of the story is excellent in its language, Holmesian deductions, atmosphere, and sharp & tight narrative. I enjoyed it hugely, despite the occasional trippings over mistakes committed by Watson.
2. The modern part of the story, with Ellery Queen's obnoxiously over-the-top attitude towards all things large & small, and the pathetically artificial caricature of characters drawn around him, made me think of pulling out my hair by the roots (whatevern is still left, that is).

Since it is Holmes v/s Ripper that is to be enjoyed, I strongly recommend that if you come across this "ye olde" volume at all, read only the Holmesian part, and meticulously avoid the Ellery Queen part. Even better, try to watch the movie which had been the basis of this book (in itself, a good novelisation of the story, but Ellery deserves to become the next victim of saucy Jack!), and enjoy.

[Mark Pearce · Rating 2 out of 5]

I've never managed to read an Ellery Queen before and, after this, I doubt I will again. It was an okay story made more enjoyable because it featured Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson. But that's about all it had going for it.

[John Peel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper sounds like a perfect case for the world's most famous detective, doesn't it? It's surprising that it took as long as it did to happen. It began as a film, and then this was novelized. And after that, the Ellery Queen portion of the book was wrapped around it. If this sounds like a very poor way of writing a book, you'd be right - it is. A good film script went through a lengthy process to turn it into a mediocre book. It's poor Sherlock Holmes and even worse Ellery Queen. Don't bother studying it.

[Riccardo Mainetti · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un amico consegna va Ellery Queen un pacchetto contenente un vecchio scritto del Dottor Watson ed Ellery si trova, a poco a poco, coinvolto nel più grande enigma dell'Inghilterra vittoriana: scoprire, dopo tre quarti di secolo, l'identità di Jack lo Squartatore

[Laura · Rating 3 out of 5]

Una lettura leggera e piacevole con cui concludere l'anno.
Purtroppo non all'altezza di altri libri di Ellery Queen, è apocrifo e lo si "sente"

[Lillian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bei Romanen, die sich einem doppelten Erzählstrang bedienen, der dazu auch noch separat voneinander gelesen werden kann, besteht immer die Gefahr, dass der eine dem anderen so sehr vorgezogen wird, dass Lesende sich endgültig entscheiden und nur eine Geschichte lesen.
So ist es mir bei der Lektüre von Ellery Queens Roman „Sherlock Holmes und Jack the Ripper“ gegangen. In abwechselnden Kapiteln wird zum einen das Abenteuer von Holmes und Watson 1888 in London dargelegt, zum anderen die Recherchen Ellery Queens zu dem Manuskript, dass er von einem Freund unter rätselhaften Umständen erhalten hat.
Queens Erzählstrang begann mich ab der Hälfte extrem zu langweilen. Die Figuren waren flach und sehr gestelzt. Das Tempo schien dem einer Schnecke zu gleichen und der Aufhänger des Ganzen, dass Queen wissen will, wer ihm das Manuskript geschickt hat und aus welchem Grund, ging unter neben dem Jammern über Schlafmangel, Abgabetermine, unzuverlässige oder nervige Freunde und den Vater, der im Urlaub unzufrieden ist. Was soll mich das interessieren? Warum ist das wichtig? Ich konnte mir die Fragen nicht durch die Lektüre beantworten, also war die Konsequenz für mich, die Kapitel von Queen zu überspringen und nur noch dem Erzählstrang von Holmes und Watson zu folgen.
Dieser lässt sich vollkommen separat lesen und hat deutlich mehr Spaß gemacht. Die Charaktere sind sehr gründlich recherchiert und ausgearbeitet worden. Die vielen Anspielungen auf die Werke von Conan Doyle waren ein gelungener Schachzug von Queen um den Lesenden zugleich auf vertrautes Gelände zu schicken und einen neuen originellen Fall zu präsentieren.
Insbesondere die Figur des Doktor Watson war überzeugend, meiner Meinung nach. Seine Äußerungen und sein Verhalten waren eine perfekte Mischung, die mich an Nigel Bruce und Martin Freeman hat denken lassen mit einer Spur von Jude Watson. Holmes dagegen bewegte sich zumeist in einer Art unerreichbaren Aura, war dadurch natürlich sehr mystisch und abgehoben. Trotzdem konnten seine Schlussfolgerungen alle nachvollziehbar und logisch begründet werden.
Bei dem Stoff um Jack the Ripper sind sich viele kreative Freizügigkeiten gestattet worden. So stimmt die Anzahl der Opfer, die Reihenfolge der Opfer, die Daten der Mordnächte und beruflichen Situationen der Ermordeten nicht mit den historischen Fakten überein. Darüber hinaus werden ausschließlich fiktive, von Queen erfundene, Charaktere als Verdächtige, Zeugen und Nebenfiguren genutzt. Auch die abschließende Auflösung und die Aufdeckung der Identität des Rippers hat nichts mit den tatsächlichen Geschehnissen zu tun.
Was mir gefehlt hat war mehr Lokalkolorit. Die Polizei wird nur am Rande durch das Auftauchen von Lestrade in einer einzelnen Szene erwähnt. Die Zustände in Whitechapel werden angedeutet, hätten aber dem ganzen Roman noch mehr Gravitas verleihen können und wären vor allem einem so emotionalen Geschichtenschreiber und Chronisten Wie Doktor Watson auf jeden Fall aufgefallen. (Auch in seiner Funktion als Arzt.) Auch die Auflösung kam fast wie aus dem Nichts. Es war mehr ein Ausschlussverfahren der einfachen Art und die Begrenzung von Tatverdächtigen von vornherein, weil Holmes und Watson halt nur an einem Ort gesucht haben, die am Ende zum Täter führte.
Abschließend noch eine Anmerkung zur Lesart: Ich habe das letzte Ellery Queen Kapitel zum Abschluss noch gelesen. Anscheinend gibt es in seinem Handlungsstrang eine Wendung und er schafft es am Ende herauszufinden, dass sich Holmes entweder geirrt hat oder Watson in seiner Berichterstattung wissentlich in die Irre geführt hat, was die Identität des Ripper angeht. Jedenfalls ist Queen davon überzeugt einen Beweis und somit die wahre Identität des Rippers erraten zu haben. An dem Ausgang der Holmes-Geschichte ändert das aber nichts. Sie kann weiterhin separat gelesen werden und ein aufmerksamer Leser oder eine Leserin wird auch ohne Queen auf die „Ungereimtheit“ stoßen. Nachträglich werde ich auf jeden Fall nicht noch mal die Queen Kapitel lesen, dafür sind sie mir zu langweilig. Schon bei der Lektüre des letzten Kapitels aus der Queen Sicht wurde mir nochmal sehr bewusst wie uninteressant der Erzählstrang für mich gewesen ist.
Als Ripper Lektüre auf jeden Fall eine Empfehlung wert, vor allem, wenn man mal abseits der historischen Fakten und als Fan von Sherlock Holmes einen Blick auf den Ripper werfen will.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

An unconventional pastiche, A Study In Terror is a novelization of the somewhat overlooked 1965 film of the same name; although whilst several prominent plot points remained, it does very much deviate from the movie it was based on. Additionally, in the tradition of those "editorial" notes which find themselves preluding many Watsonian manuscripts, explaining where this lost adventure you are about to read was uncovered, this book takes that trope a step further, weaving its origin into the story itself. Ellery Queen, knee deep into a writer's block, finds himself the unwilling recipient of what is purported to be Dr Watson's journal, but who sent it to his acquaintance, and, more importantly, why?

Thus, the reader has two mysteries to unravel, and while neither are overly complex, they both provoke the mental gears into turning, or else one risks losing the threads entirely. We follow Ellery as he reads the journal piecemeal, every chapter or two interspersed with his ruminations on what he has just read, and his acquaintance's investigation into how the manuscript came to be in his hands.

The case itself, as I mentioned, was not very difficult to solve, but there was still much fun to be had in unraveling this mystery. Aside from that, the exceptional characterizations helped me to overlook some of the more easily guessed at aspects. This was, if nothing else, a convincing pastiche that admirably met the task of conjuring Holmes & Watson as penned by Doyle.

What I did not expect from this was the twist, of sorts, at the denouement. Instead of Holmes cleanly solving the riddle, and Watson writing it down for posterity, we learn that the doctor has leapt to the wrong conclusions in penning it, with the actual solution (that we learn Holmes was aware of) being well concealed somewhere in the journal's pages. In that regard, it excelled as not only pitch-perfect pastiche, but traditionally structured mystery, where all the clues are hidden in plain sight and the solution is logically explained at the denouement. Overall, I found it to be an excellent read worthy of Holmesian attention.

[Amy H. Sturgis · Rating 1 out of 5]

As I understand it, Paul W. Fairman wrote the novelization of the film for this book (involving Sherlock Holmes and Jack the Ripper), and "Ellery Queen" (Daniel Nathan and Manford Emanuel) wrote the framing texts featuring... well, Ellery Queen. All parties should have been ashamed.

This book did nothing well.

As a Jack the Ripper story, this fails. The most basic facts of the case as known at the time of publication are overlooked or recounted in error. Most of the victims remain unnamed. And the flippant, lighthearted tone of many of the Ellery Queen interludes are jarring, not to mention disrespectful to the very real victims whose deaths supply the foundation of this tale.

As a Sherlock Holmes story, this fails. Watson is too thick by half, and both the real solution to the Jack the Ripper mystery and Sherlock Holmes's knowledge of it are telegraphed early and often. I groaned out loud as the reader was given an extended tour of what was already painfully obvious.

I'll admit I have only limited previous experience of Ellery Queen. While I was put off by the obvious assumption that his name would be at least as recognizable to future generations as that of Holmes and the Ripper (seriously???), I was soon treated to a front-row view of why this has proven not to be the case. Not only is the framing narrative of Ellery Queen reading Watson's manuscript unnecessary at the beginning and end, but it intrudes throughout the novel. Just when the main narrative almost accomplishes something, there's a painfully discordant and shallow scene that interrupts and frustrates the story. The characters range from the annoying to the loathsome.

This even failed as a novelization of the film, as it did a grave injustice to the movie's atmosphere and mood, not to mention the actors' performances, and it even changed the ending/solution from the film version.

I am fascinated by both Sherlock Holmes pastiches and works that address the Autumn of Terror. Rarely have I been so disappointed.

[Rinnerl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Schriftsteller und Detektiv Ellery Queen kämpft mit seiner Schreibmaschine. Genauer gesagt, mit einer Schreibblockade. Der Abgabetermin seines neuen Buches rückt näher und keine zündende Idee in Sicht. Seine Begeisterung hält sich daher in Grenzen, als ein Bekannter ihm ein handschriftliches Manuskript zur Begutachtung vorbeibringt. Das anonym hinterlassene Tagebuch war mit dem Hinweis versehen es Ellery Queen zukommen zu lassen. Ein erster genauer Blick trägt nicht gerade dazu bei, sein Interesse zu steigern.

Ein unbekannter Fall des Meisterdetektivs Sherlock Holmes, dokumentiert von der Hand seines Biographen und Freundes Dr. John Watson?
Ellery ist überzeugt davon, dass es sich dabei nur um eine Fälschung handeln kann.
Dennoch, ein Blick in das Tagebuch und er ist gefesselt. Der größte aller Detektive am Werk und sein Gegner ist kein Geringerer als Jack the Ripper!

Doch was steckt dahinter? Wer hat ihm das Manuskript zukommen lassen und warum? Und wer ist der Mann (oder die Frau?) die ganz London ein dreiviertel Jahrhundert zuvor in Angst und Schrecken versetzt hat?



Sherlock Holmes ist hier keine Romanfigur, sondern eine reale Person, die tatsächlich ein knappes Jahrhundert zuvor gelebt und gewirkt hat.
Zugegeben, mit diesem Buch wird das Rad nicht neu erfunden, der Schreibstil ist eher simpel und die Story an sich ist auch nicht die beste oder spannendste ever.

Und trotzdem tut es dem (meinem!) Lesevergnügen absolut keinen Abbruch. Die gut 190 Seiten lesen sich wie im Flug und lassen einen (mich) mit einem zufriedenen Lächeln auf dem Gesicht zurück.
Dafür, für das Nostalgie-Feeling (hatte das Buch vor mindestens 20 Jahren schon mal gelesen und wieder völlig vergessen) und weil ich Sherlock Holmes liebe, gibt’s 4 von 5 möglichen Sternen :)

[J · Rating 4 out of 5]

Listened to this audiobook on the roadtrip to/from Dayton with Elizabeth.

I'm so glad I picked up something else by this author. It was shorter and much more gripping than my first attempt. The audiobook/roadtrip format also worked a lot better!

Ellery is mysteriously given a previously unknown Sherlock Holmes manuscript - one of Watson's handwritten journals. The bulk of the story is Ellery reading the Holmes story (a story within the story, if you will). I loved the Holmes story which also incorporated Jack the Ripper! Ellery, Sherlock and Jack the Ripper in one tale!

[Kelvin Reed · Rating 4 out of 5]

"A Study in Terror" by "Ellery Queen" (1966, 2014) is a novel based on the film of the same name. It’s a successful attempt to capture the essence of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes tales. In this one, fictional twentieth-century detective Ellery Queen receives a Sherlock Holmes vs. Jack the Ripper manuscript anonymously and tries to determine its authenticity. I enjoyed the novel, even the periodic but short interludes of Queen’s own life. The narration by Robert Fass is well done. Solidly recommended.

[Theat · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would have given 5 stars but the story within the story, just didn't do it for me.

Its a nice idea but to me at least, it takes away one atmosphere from the other.

Its more graphic than the movie, but I liked the movie much better.

I found myself skipping over the Ellery part, only skimming to see how it played out, but the Sherlock part of the story I loved, but still liked the movie better.

[Ying_ko · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful Holmes story

The book is divided into two stories, the first about a manuscript arriving addressed to Ellery Queen and the second an unpublished Holmes story. We get to follow Queen track down the sender and Holmes and Watson track The Ripper. A very nicely crafted piece of work.

[Rick Mitchell · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful combination: Holmes and Queen. In this Queen mystery, Ellery is presented with a transcript of a Holmes adventure written by Watson. Most of the book is the manuscript and Queen (the authors) do a wonderful job of impersonating the writing of Conan Doyle, which they did with permission of his estate. Holmes solves a mystery and so does Queen. A delectable tale on two levels.

[Erik Deckers · Rating 5 out of 5]

I especially enjoyed this Ellery Queen story. It was a little disconcerting to have the flipping back and forth between the manuscript and Ellery's narrative, but it did make for an interesting way to tell the story. The Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper story has been done many times but this may be one of the more enjoyable ones I have encountered.

[Holger Haase · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fascinating concept for a novelisation of this Sherlock Holmes meets Jack the Ripper movie that includes a framing story featuring the Ellery Queen character himself and a solution that both pays homage to that of the source film while at the same time making it a surprise for readers who had already watched it.

[Leo · Rating 2 out of 5]

A book about both Sherlock Holmes and Jack the ripper sounds like a win win story to me. But sadly it just fell flat to me

[Alberto Avanzi · Rating 4 out of 5]

La madre di tutti i crossover.
Due degli investigatori più famosi di sempre in un unico romanzo. Nello specifico, è la novelization di un film, Sherlock Holmes: notti di terrore di James Hill. Come spesso accade in queste situazioni, il finale del romanzo è diverso da quello del film consentendo al lettore che ha visto il film di godersi la sorpresa, e viceversa (la stessa cosa vale per esempio per i primi adattamenti cinematografici di Dieci piccoli indiani)
Gli autori (in questo caso Dannay e Lee hanno scritto la parte ambientata negli anni ’50 e Fairman quella ottocentesca) giocano con i piani temporali usando l’espediente (come Manzoni o Eco) del manoscritto: a Ellery Queen viene consegnato, nell’America del 1958, un manoscritto inglese che sembrerebbe da attribuire a Watson, il medico amico e collaboratore di Sherlock Holmes. Nel manoscritto si racconta un’indagine segreta e mai pubblicata di Holmes, riferita al caso di Jack lo squartatore, più volte menzionato nei gialli (per esempio in Nebbia rossa di Halter)
La narrazione passa, in maniera gradevole e coerente, da uno all’altro dei piani temporali, tramite la lettura che Queen stesso fa del manoscritto. Alla fine il legame fra le due storie viene esplicitato, e viene detto (anche se il lettore esperto lo ha già intuito) perché proprio Queen è stato incaricato di leggere il manoscritto, e quale sia l’incredibile conclusione di tutta la vicenda.
Non sono un esperto di Conan Doyle, a ogni modo la narrazione del passato (sulla quale non svelo nulla per non guastare la sorpresa) mi pare molto vicina all’atmosfera di allora e molto coinvolgente. Viene ipotizzata, in maniera abbastanza plausibile, un’identità per il serial killer di Londra, e le vicende portano in modo molto brillante al disvelamento, passo per passo, della situazione, con (come consueto nei migliori Ellery Queen) un bel colpo di scena finale (anche questo, per il lettore esperto, non del tutto inaspettato ma comunque gradevole e apprezzato) che necessita del collegamento con la vicenda degli anni ’50, che inizialmente sembrava stonata rispetto all’altra vicenda (quando si intercalava, non vedevo l’ora che finisse per tornare alla lettura della trama principale) ma che nel complesso ha il suo perché nell’economia del romanzo.


Una lettura che ho trovato molto gradevole e che consiglio a tutti gli appassionati di giallo classico.

[J. Rubino · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received a copy of this book, published in 1966 under the title "Sherlock Holmes Versus Jack The Ripper", apparently a novelization of the 1965 film "A Study in Terror" and originally published under that title.
The book has Ellery Queen receiving an unauthenticated manuscript of Holmes' encounter by the Ripper, and so the tale of the adventure is periodically interrupted by Queen's investigation, commentary and his revision of Watson's conclusions.
Unfortunately, that is the major problem with the book. The pacing and tone of the plot is seriously thrown off by these distracting interruptions and I found myself skipping them except for the last. The other issue - which must be attributed to the original material, since this is a novelization - is that the JTR plot, identity of the Ripper and conclusion are rather weak and so, what ought to be the high point of the tale is somewhat of a letdown.
But I will give five stars to the author's ability, in the Holmes/Ripper section of the book to match Conan Doyle's prose style. Certainly among the best attempts I've read to persuade the reader that this is an authentic Holmes tale.

[P.Chang · Rating 4 out of 5]

ชอบ เขียนออกมาได้ดี การวางเนื้อเรื่องทำได้ดี เนื้อเรื่องจะแบ่งออกเป็น 2 ช่วงเวลาสลับกัน คือช่วงปัจจุบันของเอลเลอรี่ ควีน และเนื้อเรื่องในอดีต ที่มาในรูปแบบบันทึกของนายแพทย์วัตสัน นั้นทำให้เรายังคงต้องทึ่งในความสามารถของโฮล์มส์ ที่คราวนี้มาจากปลายปากกาของเอลเลอรี่ ควีน ต้องอ่านกันจนหน้าสุดท้าย ถึงจะเจอตัวตนที่แท้จริงของฆาตกร ผู้มีฉายานามว่าแจ็คเดอะริปเปอร์ หน้าสุดท้ายจริง ๆ....

การแปล แปลออกมาได้ดี ค่อนข้างลื่นไหล ใช้ภาษาได้ดี แต่ภาษาสำนวนจะเก่าหน่อย

เนื้อเรื่อง เปิดมาทีเอลเลอรี่ ควีน กำลังเขียนต้นฉบับเรื่องใหม่ แล้วเพื่อนสนิทของเขาก็เข้ามาขัดจังหวะ โดยนำเอกสารบางอย่างมาให้เขา เขาได้เปิดอ่าน แล้วพบว่า มันเป็นบันทึกของนายแพทย์จอห์น วัตสัน ผู้เป็นคู่หูและเพื่อนรักของเชอร์ล็อก โฮล์มส์ แล้วจึงตัดมาที่บันทึกบทที่ 1 การเริ่มต้นของคดีแจ็คเดอะริปเปอร์ โดยเนื้อเรื่องจะสลับกันไปกลับเวลาในปัจจุบัน ที่เอลเลอรี่ ควีน ได้ส่งให้เพื่อนของเขา ไปตามสืบหาคนที่ส่งต้นฉบับนี้มาให้เพื่อนของเขา สลับกับการที่เขาอ่านบันทึก ของนายแพทย์วัตสัน เนื้อเรื่องดำเนินไป จนกระทั่งเอลเลอรี่ ควีน ได้พบตัวผู้ส่งบันทึกเล่มนี้มาให้เขา พร้อม ๆ กับที่เชอร์ล็อก โฮล์มส์ ได้ค้นพบตัวฆาตกรต่อเนื่องแจ๊คเดอะริปเปอร์...

#Panอ่าน








 

[Shawn Bramanti · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was a pretty entertaining story. I don't think I have read any other Ellery Queen books, but I probably will after reading this one. I have always liked Sherlock Holmes and this one was entertaining. I think it is important for modern readers to get their heads around the idea that characters from the past were written in a time without a lot of modern things and they do have shortcomings. That being said, they are sometimes interesting just for the anachronisms in the stories. I'm not thinking of anything in particular just that the book was written in one era with a supposedly lost manuscript from another older era, and for me it all hung together airly well. I liked it.

[Robert Jr. · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this one, it had the elements of horror and gaslight-pulp that I craved when I heard about it, the reason I bought it. There's not really much to say about it other than I do recommend this one to anyone interested in Sherlock Holmes, Jack the Ripper, and to a lesser extent, Ellery Queen. When I was made aware of the book, I had already known about Ellery Queen and I think I had tried once to read one of those books as a kid but just was not interested then, anyway, when I was made aware of the book I immediately knew what I wanted from it and now that I've read it, I was not disappointed.

[Michael Fredette · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Study in Terror, Ellery Queen [Mysterious Press/Open Road, 1966].

Amateur detective Ellery Queen comes into possession of a lost journal of Dr. John Watson—which forms a story-within-story chronicling Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson’s attempts to solve the Jack the Ripper case. A fun and engaging Sherlock Holmes pastiche, though the solution was somewhat unconvincing.

***
Ellery Queen is the pseudonym of Frederic Dannay and Manfred B. Lee. The authors of numerous Ellery Queen mysteries, their work was also adapted for radio, comics, television, and movies. In the words of New York Times mystery book critic Anthony Boucher, “Ellery Queen is the American mystery.”