What do you think?
Rate this book
How Watson Learned the Trick
This lavish cloth-bound gift edition faithfully recreates in beautiful detail the Sherlock Holmes story Arthur Conan Doyle wrote especially for the Library of Queen Mary's Dolls' House in 1922. In this classic story, Watson tries to mimic Holmes's mastery of the art of deduction with very funny results, making this a book for both adults and children to delight in. Alongside the miniature book, which measures just 38.5 x 30 mm, the edition also contains an informative booklet with a transcript of the story and information about the Dolls' House. Queen Mary's Dolls' House is the largest and most famous of its kind in the world, and has a library containing miniature works by all the major writers and artists of the day.
Hardcover
First published August 24, 1924
5 people are currently reading
422 people want to read
About the author
Arthur Conan Doyle
15.4k books24.1k followersSir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle was a British writer and physician. He created the character Sherlock Holmes in 1887 for A Study in Scarlet, the first of four novels and fifty-six short stories about Holmes and Dr. Watson. The Sherlock Holmes stories are milestones in the field of crime fiction.
Doyle was a prolific writer. In addition to the Holmes stories, his works include fantasy and science fiction stories about Professor Challenger, and humorous stories about the Napoleonic soldier Brigadier Gerard, as well as plays, romances, poetry, non-fiction, and historical novels. One of Doyle's early short stories, "J. Habakuk Jephson's Statement" (1884), helped to popularise the mystery of the brigantine Mary Celeste, found drifting at sea with no crew member aboard.
Doyle was a prolific writer. In addition to the Holmes stories, his works include fantasy and science fiction stories about Professor Challenger, and humorous stories about the Napoleonic soldier Brigadier Gerard, as well as plays, romances, poetry, non-fiction, and historical novels. One of Doyle's early short stories, "J. Habakuk Jephson's Statement" (1884), helped to popularise the mystery of the brigantine Mary Celeste, found drifting at sea with no crew member aboard.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
September 28, 2015
This is a super cool item. It should be a hit with lovers of Arthur Conan Doyle, doll and doll house lovers and fans of the royal family. Super short story that most people don't even know exists as well as super hilarious. Beautiful presentation that would make a fantastic gift.
August 6, 2016
It is more of joke than short story with Doyle telling us why Sherlockean tricks are not to be done at home. Read it here (takes about two minutes)
September 13, 2015
Oh, bless Watson! Did he really think that Sherlock's deducing skills were that easy to acquire?
A fun, very short story written by Arthur Conan Doyle for the Queen Mary's doll's house in Windsor.
A fun, very short story written by Arthur Conan Doyle for the Queen Mary's doll's house in Windsor.
October 18, 2016
Such a fun, short little Holmes parody by Doyle! It's basically a little scene that happens a great deal in the Sherlock Holmes stories, and even in the BBC Sherlock series.
September 18, 2024
A spiritual sequel to 'The Field Bazaar', this time only a few paragraphs in length. These short little windows into the lives of Holmes and Watson really deepen the relationship between them. Like with that earlier work, it's such a shame this story isn't longer. 3 stars.
January 4, 2017
This is a replica of the Sherlock Holmes short story that was written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in 1922 for Queen Mary, wife of King George V. Many writers of the time were requested to create books for Queen Mary's Doll House library. This is an original story that has Watson trying and failing to use Sherlock's method of deductive reasoning. This is a beautiful reproduction of the original handwritten manuscript. Readers who enjoy Sherlock Holmes or miniature books will find this of interest; readers who enjoy both will be thrilled.
December 18, 2015
Oh this was so much fun to read, Doyle trolling Watson! I have no idea why this short story is not included in the "Complete Sherlock Holmes" collection ...it is written by Doyle after all.
April 22, 2018
This was a teeeeeny tiny book written in Doyle's handwriting for a royal dollhouse. Super fun!
July 1, 2018
A short parody where Dr. Watson thinks he's learned a few things while watching Sherlock Holmes. Witty and clever.
March 19, 2019
This is an extremely short story, but it gives the reader one more opportunity to see Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson discussing his "methods" of deduction.
April 5, 2024
Short and humorous: exceptionally entertaining and quick-witted. I adore Sherlock Holmes and any short story I can find, I appreciate.
July 13, 2023
words cannot explain how much i enjoy these little exchanges between holmes and watson, simply adorable
May 17, 2023
A super short blurb where Watson attempts to deduct a bunch of things about Sherlock one morning.
Pretty funny. Very very short.
Pretty funny. Very very short.
December 29, 2017
I got this for Christmas as a bit of a lark, hoping that Watson would ... ah but that would be spoilers. It was great, the background reading booklet was super interesting and the sweetest miniature Sherlock Holmes book to go with it. Perfect for the Holmesian collector or just a little bookwork needing books for the dolls house.
February 16, 2024
Read on a Sherlock Holmes fan website. It was alright, I guess.
Fun fact: This story was hand-written by Arthur Conan Doyle as a tiny manuscript and gifted to Queen Mary for her Dolls’ House Library.
Fun fact: This story was hand-written by Arthur Conan Doyle as a tiny manuscript and gifted to Queen Mary for her Dolls’ House Library.
February 4, 2017
The story was all right. It was kinda humorous, but all in all, it felt like it was still in its old time frame of speaking. To simplify, the story did not age well.
March 12, 2022
It is basically a satirical take on Watson's attempt to outsmart Sherlock Holmes.
August 29, 2025
#Binge Reviewing my previous Reads #Holmes
When I first came across this tale back in 1997, it felt like discovering a secret note slipped between the pages of the Sherlockian canon—a playful aside from Arthur Conan Doyle, brief as a sigh, yet filled with warmth and irony. By then I had already read much of Holmes and Watson: the long cases and the terse ones, the weighty tragedies and the neat puzzles.
This little sketch, written originally in 1922 for Queen Mary’s Dolls’ House, stood apart. It was not a full case, not even a short story in the traditional sense, but rather a scene, a fragment of dialogue, and yet it captured the very heartbeat of the Holmes–Watson relationship. For someone like me, who always gravitated more toward Watson than Holmes, this piece was like a wink in my direction—a tribute, perhaps, to the very man who had carried us through all the adventures.
The premise is simple, almost laughably so. Watson, after years of trailing Holmes and marvelling at his uncanny deductions, decides to try his hand at the master’s art. He attempts to read Holmes in the way Holmes has so often read him—observing small details, drawing sweeping conclusions, and reconstructing actions from evidence.
For a moment, Watson seems to shine. But Holmes, with his dry amusement, quickly picks apart the reasoning and demonstrates the flaws. Watson’s effort, earnest and well-meant, collapses under the weight of Holmes’s superior logic. And that’s all there is to it — no murder, no mystery, no villain lurking in the fog. Just two men in conversation, one trying to imitate the other, and the gentle comedy that arises when imitation falls short.
Yet this fragment tells us so much. Doyle, who by the 1920s had grown weary of his most famous creation, still couldn’t resist sketching these two companions. But instead of another grand adventure, he gave us a playful miniature, almost a parody, where Watson gets to step into Holmes’s shoes.
The trick, of course, is that Watson has learned the form of deduction, but not its substance. He can mimic the gestures but not the genius. It is Doyle’s affectionate joke at Watson’s expense — but also a subtle recognition of why Watson matters.
For me, this story reinforced what I had always felt: Watson is the heart of the canon. He may not be able to deduce like Holmes, but his loyalty, his curiosity, and his very failures are what make the stories human. Holmes alone would be a cold machine, dazzling but distant. With Watson beside him, he becomes part of a duo, a partnership that has warmth and humour.
In How Watson Learned the Trick, we see Watson trying to claim some of Holmes’s brilliance, and failing — and yet, in that failure, we see why he is indispensable. His attempt to rise to the level of the master is endearing, not pathetic. It is what makes him our surrogate, our window into Holmes’s world.
Looking back, reading this in 1997 as a teenager, I felt it as a kind of comic interlude after the heavier stories of The Case-Book. But now, with the distance of years and having heard audio renditions that bring out the sly humour in their voices, I see it as Doyle’s farewell joke — a little flourish reminding us that the greatest detective in literature would have been nothing without his chronicler.
How Watson Learned the Trick is not a case to solve, but a relationship distilled. In its brevity, it tells us the essential truth: Holmes may always win the argument, but Watson wins our hearts.
When I first came across this tale back in 1997, it felt like discovering a secret note slipped between the pages of the Sherlockian canon—a playful aside from Arthur Conan Doyle, brief as a sigh, yet filled with warmth and irony. By then I had already read much of Holmes and Watson: the long cases and the terse ones, the weighty tragedies and the neat puzzles.
This little sketch, written originally in 1922 for Queen Mary’s Dolls’ House, stood apart. It was not a full case, not even a short story in the traditional sense, but rather a scene, a fragment of dialogue, and yet it captured the very heartbeat of the Holmes–Watson relationship. For someone like me, who always gravitated more toward Watson than Holmes, this piece was like a wink in my direction—a tribute, perhaps, to the very man who had carried us through all the adventures.
The premise is simple, almost laughably so. Watson, after years of trailing Holmes and marvelling at his uncanny deductions, decides to try his hand at the master’s art. He attempts to read Holmes in the way Holmes has so often read him—observing small details, drawing sweeping conclusions, and reconstructing actions from evidence.
For a moment, Watson seems to shine. But Holmes, with his dry amusement, quickly picks apart the reasoning and demonstrates the flaws. Watson’s effort, earnest and well-meant, collapses under the weight of Holmes’s superior logic. And that’s all there is to it — no murder, no mystery, no villain lurking in the fog. Just two men in conversation, one trying to imitate the other, and the gentle comedy that arises when imitation falls short.
Yet this fragment tells us so much. Doyle, who by the 1920s had grown weary of his most famous creation, still couldn’t resist sketching these two companions. But instead of another grand adventure, he gave us a playful miniature, almost a parody, where Watson gets to step into Holmes’s shoes.
The trick, of course, is that Watson has learned the form of deduction, but not its substance. He can mimic the gestures but not the genius. It is Doyle’s affectionate joke at Watson’s expense — but also a subtle recognition of why Watson matters.
For me, this story reinforced what I had always felt: Watson is the heart of the canon. He may not be able to deduce like Holmes, but his loyalty, his curiosity, and his very failures are what make the stories human. Holmes alone would be a cold machine, dazzling but distant. With Watson beside him, he becomes part of a duo, a partnership that has warmth and humour.
In How Watson Learned the Trick, we see Watson trying to claim some of Holmes’s brilliance, and failing — and yet, in that failure, we see why he is indispensable. His attempt to rise to the level of the master is endearing, not pathetic. It is what makes him our surrogate, our window into Holmes’s world.
Looking back, reading this in 1997 as a teenager, I felt it as a kind of comic interlude after the heavier stories of The Case-Book. But now, with the distance of years and having heard audio renditions that bring out the sly humour in their voices, I see it as Doyle’s farewell joke — a little flourish reminding us that the greatest detective in literature would have been nothing without his chronicler.
How Watson Learned the Trick is not a case to solve, but a relationship distilled. In its brevity, it tells us the essential truth: Holmes may always win the argument, but Watson wins our hearts.
May 25, 2023
Eh...it was all right.
I really am very sorry to rate this so low for an original Sherlock Holmes story written by Arthur Conan Doyle of all people, because if anyone knows me, that means they know that the Sherlock Holmes series is my favorite literary series of all time. However, this tiny little story absolutely had the potential to still hit home, but it just...didn't. I remember being extraordinarily excited when I first heard about this and "The Field Bazaar," ACD's other lesser-known Holmes story. But while *that* was actually pretty good, this literally read so satirically that it felt like I was reading a badly written pastiche by a non-Sherlockian who thought he'd just take a stab at writing Victoriana. Seriously. The Watson portrayed here is the ONLY time in the Canon that it feels like a Nigel Bruce Watson and not a Jude Law/David Burke/Edward Hardwicke/Martin Freeman Watson. It seems so out of character for him to claim that Holmes's deductive faculties can be "really easily acquired." I understand he said that "severely," meaning he was probably just trying to jab at him out of jealousy or something (similarly to in The Sign of Four), but still...this story didn't feel nearly as in-character as the rest of the Canon.
I obviously don't hate it, and I did think it was funny to read, but then again, since when was the point of reading a Sherlock Holmes story for it to be "funny" to read? Entertaining? Yes. Intriguing? Definitely. Containing amusing scenes along the way? Sure; of course! But that was never the focal point of an SH story. Thankfully, it's short enough to be tolerable in its amusement. I did like "The Field Bazaar," though, even though it was really more an advertisement than anything else. XD
All in all, if you like incredibly minuscule short stories, go for it. Won't do ya any harm. But please...for my sake, for Holmes's sake, and for the sake of all things Victorian...READ THE CANON.
I really am very sorry to rate this so low for an original Sherlock Holmes story written by Arthur Conan Doyle of all people, because if anyone knows me, that means they know that the Sherlock Holmes series is my favorite literary series of all time. However, this tiny little story absolutely had the potential to still hit home, but it just...didn't. I remember being extraordinarily excited when I first heard about this and "The Field Bazaar," ACD's other lesser-known Holmes story. But while *that* was actually pretty good, this literally read so satirically that it felt like I was reading a badly written pastiche by a non-Sherlockian who thought he'd just take a stab at writing Victoriana. Seriously. The Watson portrayed here is the ONLY time in the Canon that it feels like a Nigel Bruce Watson and not a Jude Law/David Burke/Edward Hardwicke/Martin Freeman Watson. It seems so out of character for him to claim that Holmes's deductive faculties can be "really easily acquired." I understand he said that "severely," meaning he was probably just trying to jab at him out of jealousy or something (similarly to in The Sign of Four), but still...this story didn't feel nearly as in-character as the rest of the Canon.
I obviously don't hate it, and I did think it was funny to read, but then again, since when was the point of reading a Sherlock Holmes story for it to be "funny" to read? Entertaining? Yes. Intriguing? Definitely. Containing amusing scenes along the way? Sure; of course! But that was never the focal point of an SH story. Thankfully, it's short enough to be tolerable in its amusement. I did like "The Field Bazaar," though, even though it was really more an advertisement than anything else. XD
All in all, if you like incredibly minuscule short stories, go for it. Won't do ya any harm. But please...for my sake, for Holmes's sake, and for the sake of all things Victorian...READ THE CANON.
January 4, 2025
I'm including this more for the sake of completion than anything else. "How Watson Learned the Trick" is less a story and more a fun little anecdote. At only 500 words, we see Watson getting a bit full of himself and showing off to Holmes how "easy" his deductions are to make.
Not to read too much into it, but I think it also serves as a little reminder from Doyle that he doesn't write Holmes stories by plucking unbelievable deductions out of thin air like SOMEONE (Moffat). But that the deductions conjured should generally:
a) Fall within a window of reasonability.
b) Weave within one another to paint a single image - rather that disparate images that then need to be woven together again.
In other words, as Holmes himself puts it, "It 's a very superficial trick Watson, and no doubt you will soon acquire it"
Not to read too much into it, but I think it also serves as a little reminder from Doyle that he doesn't write Holmes stories by plucking unbelievable deductions out of thin air like SOMEONE (Moffat). But that the deductions conjured should generally:
a) Fall within a window of reasonability.
b) Weave within one another to paint a single image - rather that disparate images that then need to be woven together again.
In other words, as Holmes himself puts it, "It 's a very superficial trick Watson, and no doubt you will soon acquire it"
March 21, 2024
NB: Did not actually read this edition, just read the stories online.
Both very short, to the point where I feel like I'm cheating counting this as 24 pages in my Goodreads count, and both just little vignettes where Holmes proves that he's smarter than Watson while they eat breakfast. "Field Bazaar" is particularly limp, since Holmes' brilliant deduction mostly comes down to "I figured out who sent you a letter by reading the envelope." "How Watson Learned the Trick" at least has a mildly amusing punchline.
Anyway, far from the best Holmes stories, but not the worst way that you could spend ten minutes.
Both very short, to the point where I feel like I'm cheating counting this as 24 pages in my Goodreads count, and both just little vignettes where Holmes proves that he's smarter than Watson while they eat breakfast. "Field Bazaar" is particularly limp, since Holmes' brilliant deduction mostly comes down to "I figured out who sent you a letter by reading the envelope." "How Watson Learned the Trick" at least has a mildly amusing punchline.
Anyway, far from the best Holmes stories, but not the worst way that you could spend ten minutes.
Read
February 27, 2025No rating - this is more of a historical/literary curiosity than a full fledged literary work. It was written for a collection of stories destined to appear in a miniature book, part of Queen Mary’s Doll house.
June 20, 2025
I was so excited to find out there was another Sherlock Holmes story I hadn't read! I enjoyed immersing myself in Doyle's world again. Watson was very sassy which I found hilarious. Holmes was acceptably superior.🔎
July 30, 2018
3.5 out of 5
March 8, 2020
Watson's experience here would likely match my own, were I to attempt to apply Holmes' logic.
March 21, 2020
Such a beautiful book! The booklet of information about the doll's house is far more interesting than Doyle's slightly contrived story though.
June 24, 2020
Poor perpetually suffering Watson. I would’ve liked a few more of these!
I would love to see this up close and personal in its fully realised miniature doll house book form 🙊
I would love to see this up close and personal in its fully realised miniature doll house book form 🙊
October 18, 2020
Charming, hilarious, wry, brilliant, and relevant.
February 22, 2021
This was a fun parody written by ACD about how Watson tells Holmes how he 'learned' his method of solving crimes through logical deduction.
June 29, 2021
Watson tries, he really does.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews