Spine Crackers discussion

This topic is about
Fragile Things
Book Discussions
>
Fragile Things: Short Fictions and Wonders by Neil Gaiman
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Caitlin
(new)
-
rated it 4 stars
Jan 16, 2016 11:21AM

reply
|
flag
I saw as I was scrolling past the introduction that Neil Gaiman kinda gives a short explanation about the stories. I normally don't read introductions, but now i'm wondering if any of you did before starting the actual book?


Fragile Things was actually the first book I ever read by Neil. Personal, I always make it a point to read his introductions. I really enjoy the background info.
After reading the first short story, " A Study in Purple" I think my plan is going to be to read the story, then flip back and read what Gaiman has to say. I like the surprise of not knowing what the story is going to be, but being able to go back and get an explanation.
Also, I really loved " A Study in Purple".
Also, I really loved " A Study in Purple".

Now, let's talk about "A Study in Emerald!!"
SPOILERS
I went through the entire story, right up to the end, thinking I knew who the narrator was, who the "friend" was, and understood Gaiman's twist on Doyle's world. Discovering at the end that the crippled doctor, that Rache, were in fact Watson & Holmes was a brilliant twist!
A Study in Purple? What was I talking about?
Elizabeth wrote: "Wow. So, honestly, I love Gaiman as much as the next person, but I think in some ways a short-story collection as long as this may be a bit too much Gaiman for me. Some of the stories ("A Study In ..."
I'm having an issue that every story has another story in it. It's charming at first but after the third one it seems like enough. Which is a huge bummer because the first few stories were really interesting in Gaiman's usual creepy-whimsical way. Maybe “A Study of Emerald” just set the bar to high for the rest of the stories?
SPOILERS
“A Study in Emerald” - Ugh, that twist was so good. After the reveal that Sherlock and Watson were the bad guys I went back and skimmed looking for name drops and obviously found none. I liked that he relied on the fact that people know this story well enough that we are going to fall into that trap. Also, it was fun to find that we don’t know who the narrator’s “Friend” is. Is it Moriarty like we (or at least I) assumed, or is the “Friend” still Sherlock, but Watson ended up with Moriarty somehow. It brought up a lot of questions and, like a good short story should, made me want to have more of it.
Elizabeth wrote: "Wow. So, honestly, I love Gaiman as much as the next person, but I think in some ways a short-story collection as long as this may be a bit too much Gaiman for me. Some of the stories ("A Study In ..."
I'm having an issue that every story has another story in it. It's charming at first but after the third one it seems like enough. Which is a huge bummer because the first few stories were really interesting in Gaiman's usual creepy-whimsical way. Maybe “A Study of Emerald” just set the bar to high for the rest of the stories?
SPOILERS
“A Study in Emerald” - Ugh, that twist was so good. After the reveal that Sherlock and Watson were the bad guys I went back and skimmed looking for name drops and obviously found none. I liked that he relied on the fact that people know this story well enough that we are going to fall into that trap. Also, it was fun to find that we don’t know who the narrator’s “Friend” is. Is it Moriarty like we (or at least I) assumed, or is the “Friend” still Sherlock, but Watson ended up with Moriarty somehow. It brought up a lot of questions and, like a good short story should, made me want to have more of it.