So this is one of the best books I have read in a long time. It is like it was written specifically for me. I love it, I love it, I love it.

I don't even know what to say so I don't give too much away. I have been a long time fan of Katherine Addison, including her writing under the name Sarah Monette. I will read anything she writes, and I already had this book preordered, so when I was able to snag this as an electronic ARC via Netgalley (in exchange for an honest review) I was thrilled. I honestly didn't know anything about it going into it. I have had a real difficult reading during the pandemic, and this shook me out of my rut perfectly. I went from not sleeping because of pandemic-anxiety to not sleeping because I was staying up late reading. It was a wonderful change of pace.

If you don't want any spoilers, don't read past this. Just go buy this wonderfully, lovely, humane book. Preorder it from your local bookstore right now. Email your local library and politely demand they purchase many electronic editions.

It starts with a medical doctor being injured in the leg in Afghanistan in the 19th century, and being saved by his orderly named Murray. But the doctor was injured by a Fallen Angel and was injured in some sort of supernatural way. I immediately went to twitter and lost my mind about the idea because SUPERNATURAL SHERLOCK HOLMES OH DANG BRING IT COUNT ME IN. It's just *so* clever and *so* well done and it's not just re-told Sherlock Holmes stories, everything is re-imagined in for this different world, and it fits so beautifully. Everything terrible about the late 19th and early 20th century is made better, and it's like a cool drink of water on a hot day.

Seeing Addison/Monette getting to write about Jack the Ripper and other murders is just icing on the cake.

First off, I would like to thank Netgalley and Tor for providing me with an e-ARC copy of The Angel of the Crows. However, this has no effect on my review, all thoughts and opinions are my own.

I feel a little bad for saying this, but when a piece of fanfiction is adopted for a book, it should probably be very closely examined by people who have less of a stake in either the source material or the fanfiction itself. This book was almost an exact mirror to the source material, especially A Study in Scarlet. Clearly the author has done a lot of research into the Victorian era and the Sherlock Holmes stories themselves. However, I would have liked to see the added elements have a little more impact on the stories themselves. It was superficially supernatural, with the actual supernatural elements having little impact, for the most part, on the stories. For me there needed to be a larger development into how the world was changed or shaped because of the existence of the supernatural.

My other main complaint is that I never really got attached to the characters. I kept on trying to separate Crow and Doyle from Sherlock and Watson, to help them be their own beings. Crow started to a bit towards the end, but Doyle was just Watson. Perhaps that is what the author was going for, but I prefer a little more distance in my retellings. Also, Crow did very little actual deducing. He is somehow correct with his guesses, despite there being little to no evidence, purely because God (the author) had decided it to be so.

I also had problems with the semi-Victorian writing style. It just made the novel drag for me and I found myself doing other things to actively avoid reading it, such as jointly reading four other books. Also, since Doyle is the main POV, and I found him a bit boring, well, you can see where this is going.

Overall, if you're a die hard of Sherlock Holmes, Victorian style writing, or wingfic you'll probably enjoy this novel a lot more than I did. If it sounds like something that you would be interested in, you should definitely check it out. It just didn't work on pretty much any level for me.

I’ve received this book via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review. The synopsis says: “This is not the story you think it is...” and that’s definitely true. It starts like a retelling of Sherlock Holmes and then it becomes something unrecognizable.. I must say I really liked the fact that the new Sherlock, that in the book is Crow, is an Angel. Sherlock has always had problems in interacting with other humans and being an angel is a great way to explain why it’s difficult for him to fit. But then the story becomes a mess, not only because the social structure is incredibly complex and there are so many supernatural characters but also because there are too many cases in which Crow and Doyle are involved. The main case is about Jack the Ripper, but it disappears among all the others and I think that most of them have been solved too easily that they could have been avoided from the start. There are two plot twists but one of them is so strange and unexpected that I had to read the page twice to see if I understood correctly.. honestly I was expecting a mystery book with supernatural elements but unfortunately I found the investigations not thrilling at all..

As a kind of supernatural retelling of Sherlock Holmes mixed in with the historical figure of Jack the Ripper this book was a must read for me. While I will admit I have not actually read a single Sherlock Holmes title by Arthur Conan Doyle (something I intend to rectify), I have watched several of the movies and series that were based upon them. I honestly cannot attest how similar the plot in The Angel of the Crows is by comparison. I do know that at least elements of the stories make an appearance. This book isn't as dark and gritty as I thought it would be; however, that didn't detract from the story at all the ambiance of the book fit the characters perfectly. One of my favorite eras is Victorian England, I'm not entirely sure why but it is one of those things that I'm drawn to with books. The book did successfully convey the near hopelessness of solving crimes in the time period and the bumbling police force that jumps to conclusions definitely doesn't help matters any. This is especially true with Jack the Ripper - even with supernatural elements willing to assist the police.

While reading I found myself slightly frustrated with the lack of background information about the world itself and the supernatural beings mentioned almost just in passing. I was disappointed with that lack of backstory or information in that regard because I find it inherently interesting and made me feel like I should just... know... more than I did. Some of these are filled slightly more later, the main ones being The Fallen, Angels, Nameless, vampires, hemophages, hell-hounds and werewolves - but I still have around a billion questions. The Angels and Fallen of this book is an interesting take on the subject and it wasn't something that I had encountered before in any book I've read.

I thoroughly enjoyed the cast of characters encountered. Crow and Dr. Doyle are well developed and definitely fit with the Sherlock and Watson personalities. Crow as Sherlock softened the often harsh edges and opinions that we see from Sherlock through the perceptions of an Angel who isn't really wired to think the same way that people do. Crow's wiring leads to some awkwardly funny situations for everyone involved. There were a few characters that I would've liked to have more character building but considering how much time they were in the book specifically it wasn't really warranted. The main character I would love to know more about, including "his" background relationship with Crow, is the Angel of Whitehall. Madame Silvanova is the other, she was an interesting entry point to other aspects of the supernatural world. They could possibly be in the next book, especially Whitehall (if there is one) and we could see more of their development in it. The revelation regarding Dr. Doyle halfway through the book totally blindsided me and at first I thought Dr. Doyle was lying to the other person in the conversation as a way to escape the situation.

I believe the world that Katherine Addison has built by combining fantasy, history and other literature is unique and could very well continue in a series of she chose to do so. I found the re-imagined Victorian Era Sherlock Holmes with a twist of supernatural enchanting and I really do hope that she will indeed write at least a second novel. I would consider this book 4.5 stars - the only thing that left me wanting was some of the background information. I would recommend this book to readers who enjoy fantasy, murder mysteries, the supernatural/paranormal, the Victorian Era, and Sherlock Holmes. A big thank you to Tor/Forge and NetGalley for the opportunity to read a digital ARC of The Angel of the Crows - all opinions are my own.

Content warning: murder/gore, LGBTQ

I read this book on strength of the author’s name. I adored The Goblin Emperor and was hoping for the same sort of light and enjoyable read. I kept reading as cozy mysteries are my second favorite genre, especially ones with a bit of paranormal in them. So she had me with the Sherlock Holmes pastiche with angels, werewolves, witches and so forth. If you think the description of the book sounds good you should find this a pleasant read!

I was intrigued by this novel given the type of urban fantasy synopsis, however, I found it a bit of a slog to go through. For me, the setup was brilliant, the lead characters interesting but I was lost when this went down a Sherlock Holmes trip. I found myself getting confused between where I thought parts of the story would go due to to Holmes references, only to be tripped up and go off on a tangent. For me, a good book and certainly one I would read again, I just would have liked some more unique storylines!

<i>Thank you to NetGalley for providing me with a free e-copy of this ARC in exchange for an honest review.</i>

<b>Oh no. <i>The Angel of the Crows</i> is a Sherlock Holmes retelling but with angels, demons, and Jack the Ripper. I was a huge Sherlock Holmes fan as a kid, so I was immediately drawn in. But unfortunately, there wasn't anything sufficiently <i>new</i> about this retelling.</b>

I don't understand why the basic premise isn't included in the summary but oh well.

<b>WHAT I LIKED</b>
1. The worldbuilding. I really enjoyed this alternate Victorian London with angels, hellhounds, vampires, and other paranormal creatures. They aren't explained in-depth, but I'm not the type of fantasy fan who likes having encyclopedic knowledge about book universes, so I didn't mind. Addison's angels are unique; they must be tied to a physical place to exist.

2. Crow (Sherlock) and Dr. Doyle's (Dr. Watson's) relationship. <b>Holmes is often a very surly, unlikable genius in other retellings, but Crow is such a sweetheart.</b> Sure, he's awkward because he's an angel who doesn't understand how humans work, but he does care about Dr. Doyle (he hugs him and professes that he misses him!), is kind to everyone who isn't police, and doesn't have the rudeness of other Holmes versions. Him and Dr. Doyle hit it off immediately, and they act more like partners than one man hanging off his genius flatmate's every word.

<b>WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE</b>
<b>While there were moments that squeezed my heart, there were many more that bored me. This doesn't have the same charm as other Sherlock Holmes retellings.</b> This is no BBC Sherlock, no Elementary, no Charlotte Holmes, no House MD... <b>Aside from adding a supernatural aspect, the mysteries are exactly the same.</b>

The novel is basically a series of short stories interlinked by one bigger mystery (the Jack the Ripper case), but even that didn't have a satisfying conclusion. <b>Crow does his signature deducing but it lacks magic, somehow.</b>

I ended up skipping Parts/mini-stories that I didn't enjoy. Some I really liked but many more were a big miss. Such a shame because I really enjoyed the concept. <b>Other Sherlock Holmes retellings add another aspect</b>; bigger focus on Holmes and Watson's relationship, or a more traditional method of mystery-solving, or even different drama all together. <b>Unfortunately, I wanted to tease more out of this one. Maybe if Addison had focused more on the relationships (or even Dr. Doyle's interesting personal arc!) then it would be more fulfilling.</b>

The Angel of the Crows is a mix of Sherlock Holmes, Jack the Ripper, and the supernatural. Dr. Doyle is a former military surgeon who was attacked by a Fallen and
was discharged. Now back in London, he meets and angel named Crow who isn’t truly an angel. Together, they help the police investigate murders and other mysteries filled with vampires, werewolves, and hell-hounds.

I feel like the premise was very intriguing, but the actual story was a little too similar to Sherlock Holmes. I would’ve liked the plot to focus more on the Jack the Ripper storyline, but it kinda jumped around to other stories a lot. Because of that, the ending to the Jack the Ripper mystery felt short and rushed.

I liked the different twists that Addison puts on the characters. The gender reveal was definitely one of my favorite parts and I wish there was more to that. There were so many interesting paths that this story could’ve explored such as the Registration Act that kept coming up, gender disparities, vampire marks, etc.

The angel aspect of this book was definitely one that I genuinely enjoyed. It was detailed and explained pretty well. I liked how every angel had wings based on a different type of bird (Crow = crow wings).

A steampunk Sherlock Holmes riff with angels, vampires and werewolves, and also the Holmes analogue is on the trail of Jack the Ripper. Which is exactly the sort of thing I would normally run a mile from – or to be more accurate, that I would have loved 25 years ago, but which now feels like thoroughly overworked territory. Still, I greatly enjoyed the only other book of Addison's I've read, her fantasy of manners The Goblin Emperor, so I requested this on Netgalley without looking too closely at the blurb, and I don't regret that, even if I wouldn't necessarily recommend this one quite so widely. The Goblin Emperor is a book which lots of people who don't think they'd like a book called The Goblin Emperor would like; it has the minute social observation, the grand balls and the finely tuned conversations, of Jane Austen, without that same besetting air of determinedly Lilliputian Middle England pettiness. Whereas here, there are going to be people who are 100% in the market for Benedict Cumberbatch's Sherlock with notes of Michael Sheen's Aziraphale, and people who really aren't, and I suspect most will know which camp they're in.

So that's Addison's Sherlock: Crow, the Angel of London. And her Watson is Dr Doyle (no, the first names are not Arthur Conan), whose Afghanistan injury is a little more complicated in this world suffused with the occult. But after they agree to room together, their first case still takes them to Lauriston Gardens, where the previous resident still died of typhoid, and the landlord still won't fix the drains. Lestrade is the same, as is the luckless Rance - though here he lives in barracks, rather than his own house. And for the most part this is how it goes - distorted reflections of the Holmes canon, and generally ones which hang together better than the flashy, fun but often incoherent Moffat/Gatiss take that inspired them. Sure, there are occasional minor glitches which don't seem so deliberate, or otherwise reminded me that I was reading a 21st century American rather than a 19th century Londoner, even an alternate one - little matters of word choice, describing Brixton as "a dismal part of east London", the modern tenor of the anti-colonialist interjections during the Sign Of The Four rework*. In places the magical set-up (which Addison frustratingly but commendably refuses to let her characters over-explain to other characters who would of course know how it works too) can feel cluttered: angels who have lost their role can be Nameless, Fallen, or simply dissolve; vampires and hemophages are separate things, as are werewolves and hell-hounds, and if you think these last two (plus ghosts, not to mention fetches and curses) being acknowledged facts might complicate The Hound Of The Baskervilles somewhat, you're not wrong. But for me the main appeal of any Holmes variant is spending time with the leads, being an invisible third to their double-act, and on that point this definitely delivers.

Also, I love that the vampires of this world seem to operate a lot like drag houses.

*A story which, for all I knew of (AC) Doyle's Norwood connection, and other Holmes cases set here, I hadn't realised took place so near to me. With our circuits so constrained since the Event, it was refreshing to again be able to visit a location I'd been reading about, and realise it sat right by one of our regular park circuits.

The Angel of the Crows is basically Sherlock fan-fiction. I can’t even say it’s thinly veiled, because it isn’t veiled at all. And I am completely okay with that.

There were a couple of pretty big twists here and there, but for the most part this book is a collection of faithful retellings of some of Doyle’s original Sherlock Holmes stories. A Study in Scarlet, The Hound of the Baskervilles, The Sign of Four, The Adventure of the Speckled Band, and more are covered in this collection. The still unsolved case of Jack the Ripper, which has been included or alluded to in many secondary works about Holmes written by other authors, is the thread which ties all of these separate cases into one cohesive narrative. But what sets this book apart from other Sherlockian stories outside of Doyle’s original canon is the author’s truly fascinating addition of the supernatural. This is not mere whiffs of supernatural in and around certain cases. Addison created a world in which the supernatural runs rampant and is accepted as reality but civilization at large.

Where the supernatural is seen most interestingly is in the Sherlock and Watson characters. Crow, the Sherlock character in this story, is an angel. Kind of. He doesn’t have his own habitation, which is what gives angels their identity. He isn’t one of the Nameless, because he managed to wrest an identity almost out of thin air. And he isn’t one of the Fallen, who are basically angels who lost their habitations and went crazy. Crow is something that no one can define, and it freaks everyone the heck out. Everyone, that is, except for Dr. J.H. Doyle, the Watson character in this tale. After being wounded in the war in Afghanistan, Doyle finds himself sharing a flat with Crow at 221B Baker Street. Addison barely deviated from the original meeting of the two, which I appreciated. From there they embark on the adventures that have become so well known over the past century, with just enough differences to keep things interesting.

The Angel of the Crows is very much rooted in the Victorian London of Doyle’s original canon. Addison stays incredibly true to the stories that provided her inspiration. But what kept this book from feeling like a stale rehashing, besides the supernatural elements, were all of the references to the BBC series that Addison included. Some of the dialogue was word for word from the show. I’ve read and loved every Sherlock story Doyle penned, but the reason behind that love is my adoration for the BBC series starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman. I have watched each and every episode multiple times; the first six episodes I’ve watched half a dozen times at least. It’s my sentimental favorite series ever. When Addison opened the book with a quote from the show, I was already won over. But every time she gave the series even the slightest of nods in the narrative it made me giddy. I mean, she gave Crow wings with the same level of moodiness and sass as Sherlock’s coat gave him in the show. The biggest change was Crow’s complete innocence and joy over the smallest things. Since these personality traits make him very believable as an angel, so I’m totally in favor of them. And I really don’t think they’re too far off from Sherlock’s portrayal in the show.
If you’re a fan of the original Doyle canon, this is a fun replay of some of its greatest hits, so to speak. Does it do anything truly new? No. The core of the stories are exactly the same. But the trappings are a lot of fun. And if you’re as obsessed with BBC’s Sherlock as I am, The Angel of the Crows is going to make you really happy. It’s as light and sweet and frothy as any plot relying on murder can get.

A well composed story with an interesting plot. The characters were instantly like-able and had a dry sense of humor which I appreciated. However, I am just the type of person who does not really enjoy whodunnits as much as I enjoy mystery/thrillers. I thought the fantasy aspect would sway a little more in my favour but unfortunately not.

Additionally, I was slightly irked that the different sects of angels (i.e. nameless and fallen) were not well explained? I remained confused why these were introduced and what was the story behind them?

Thank you to Netgalley and Tor Books for the opportunity to receive this arc in exchange of an honest review.

I’m a big fan of Caleb Carr so this was right up my alley - clever dialogue, mystery, history, and fantasy! Loved it!

I received this free ARC from Netgalley in exchange for a sincere review.

Addison stated in her acknowledgements that this book started as a Sherlock wingfic, a subgenre of fanfiction in which one or more characters gets wings.

As I read through The Angel of the Crows, I realized it was, indeed, fanfiction. That caught me completely by surprise, as there wasn't any indication that this was going to be not only a reimagining of Doyle's Sherlock, but pretty much the original material with only the protagonists' names modified and some urban fantasy elements thrown over everything.

It IS a great read, when the original elements shine on their own or when Doyle's now obsolete customs get questioned in ways that don't clash with the time period in regards to gender, sexuality and identity, and Addison's prose is more than just 'good enough', her words seem carefully chosen to make this read a enjoyable one.

That being said, I wish this reimagining had gone beyond, had done more. And I would have also liked to know beforehand what was I getting into, as it seems that the publishing house wants to hide the fact that this is, indeed, a Sherlock fanfiction.

All in all, it made me feel nostalgic for the years I burrowed myself in not only reading but also writing my own fics, I miss those days, maybe this book is what's going to bring me back to old habits.

I have not read "The Goblin Emperor" but heard enough praise for it to pick up "The Angel of the Crows" with pretty big expectations. Unfortunately, despite the author's obvious talent with the language (the writing is superb), I was ultimately disappointed by the novel.

I think it can be best summed up by the author's admission at the end - this was originally a Sherlock Holmes fanfic, with an angel-twist. And it shows - not in the writing, but in the storytelling. Or should I say RETELLING.

The author spends the vast majority of the book simply retelling Sherlock Holmes' most famous adventures. The only change is the setting - this England is filled with angels, vampires, werewolves, ghouls, and other paranormal beings (some of them confusing, as they are just named, but their specific nature not explained). To make things more confusing, about 1/3rd into the book a steam punk element is introduced, and feels very out-of-place.

Sherlock-equivalent himself is an angel named Crow and a wasted opportunity. I was hoping for an angel-equivalent of Cumberbatch's Sherlock (complicated, infuriating, mesmerizing), instead I got a pretty bland detective. The Watson equivalent named Doyle is the most interesting part of the story, but not interesting enough to carry me through the very familiar adventures and mysteries. The author uses the search for Jack the Ripper as the framing device, but even that story has been done to death and brings nothing captivating to the plot.

I regret to say that the only part of this novel I enjoyed is the author's handling of the language itself. Beautiful prose. But I found myself wishing that she had written a more original novel.

This is far more a book for hardcore Sherlock fans than it is for readers of fantasy. Although there are a lot of interesting fantasy elements - werewolves, angels, clairvoyants - none of them really felt utilised to their full potential, and the story revolved around rewriting canon Sherlock cases, which was utterly mind-numbing to someone with no interest in Sherlock or in that particular style of mystery. Really disappointed, especially given the 'this is not the story you think it is' featured in the blurb - that had me thinking I was wrong about the fanatical adherence to all things Sherlock, and that the 'real' story would emerge if I just stuck with it long enough. I'd definitely recommend leaning on the Sherlock angle in future marketing, since I'm not sure non-Sherlock fans are going to get a lot out of this one.

First and foremost, I’d like to thank NetGalley and Tor Books for this ARC in exchange for an honest opinion.

The Angel of the Crows is a blend of a story retelling of the enigmatic killing spree of Jack the Ripper, at the same time, its a fanfiction of infamous cases solved by Sherlock Holmes. Admittedly, I was drawn to the blurb about Jack the Ripper, it’s an unsolved mystery that I loved to think on time and time again. Being a fan of the classic cases of Sherlock Holmes, the story is mostly on a supernatural take of London during the 1880s with the added bonus of creatures such as werewolves, vampires, and hell-hounds. I am actually familiar with “wingfic” fanfictions, however, it’s a first for me to read a Sherlock Holmes inspired wingfic. On a whole, The Angel of the Crows begins on the uncanny friendship between Doctor J.H. Doyle, and the Angel of London, Mr. Crow.

Similarly to the dynamics of Mr. Holmes and Dr. Watson, the duo of the story goes around London solving different mysteries while living together in Baker Street. As a whole, I love the world that Ms. Katherine made, the concept of the Angels, the Fallen, and the Nameless is certainly unique in the story. Humans live with an intricate balance with other supernatural beings in the story. Ideally, I like how the story still tackled on the world-building, even though I wished the laws on the Angels were expounded a bit more. Through the book, I questioned as well on Mr. Crow’s peculiar situation where he isn’t really a Fallen and is not a Nameless either.

I particularly like the character Doctor Doyle in this book. The doctor just returned to London after an incident in Afghanistan. On his return, Doctor Doyle wanted to find a flatmate which later revealed to be an Angel named Mr. Crow. While Mr. Crow did capture my interest, I enjoyed the story through Doctor Doyle’s eyes, while the doctor did have a fair share of secrets. There were plenty of things to Mr. Crow as well than meets the eye.

Being familiar with the cases of Sherlock Holmes, the book felt both new and story retelling. I felt that if the reader knows their way around the cases of Holmes, the story is just a reread but with a slight twist. Personally, I wished there was an element of adding a new case in order to really engage readers in the story. I am also aware of the mysterious killings of Jack The Ripper, so it’s a book that literally took me down memory lane. Through the several storylines, there were good plot-twists and nicely timed humor.

One thing that I particularly noticed with the writing in the story is that there were several parts in the book that did come out as dragging. There were moments I wanted to simply skip because it really caused the flow to waver. Then with the side of the Ripper case, where I wished that Mr. Crow could’ve offered more detailed deductions on the findings, theories could’ve been expounded. It is one of the reasons I couldn’t rate this solid five stars. Most of Mr. Crow’s cases didn’t produce a well-crafted deduction and pieces of evidence that leads to the answer to the case. Of course, Doctor Doyle’s medical findings did shed light on a few cases. I wished, with the case of the Ripper Killings, Mr. Crow had his own insights. I think that for those who are first-timers might enjoy this book. As mentioned in the Author’s notes, this is a fanfiction, while it is also a retelling. In general, I found the story a good 4 out of 5 stars.

I enjoyed the familiarity of the cases in London and walking through Baker Street in the fantasy aspect. While Jack the Ripper case is also fairly mentioned throughout the book, I still felt that that wow factor fell a bit short. Nonetheless, I would highly recommend this for those into Supernatural mystery, and wanting a first taste on classic cases as well.

The Angel of the Crows charmed me so quickly with it’s ‘wings AU’ take on Sherlock and Jack the Ripper. The world building Addison did with the various creatures of London was delightful, but I especially loved the relationship between angels and their domains—landmark buildings. I could use a whole series about the other angels in this world, the angelic Consensus of other cities. The way Addison used Victorian society, supernatural creatures, and science to pick apart and highlight gender, race, and colonization makes it worth the read alone.

As charmed as I was halfway through, especially with Doyle and Crow’s building relationship, the ending felt not quite as satisfying. The closure of the main mystery of the book was closed in one rushed chapter and I couldn’t help but wish for Doyle, Crow, Moriarty, and even Jack the Ripper for have more time for resolution. However the strings left dangling about Moriarty and Doyle leave me hopeful for a sequel I’d love to read.

As the author herself admits, The Angel of the Crows is a Sherlock Holmes fanfiction (and a very well-written one). It was quite imaginative and catapulted the reader into a Victorian England filled with angels, vampires, werewolves and other paranormal creatures.

I'd be lying if I said that I did not enjoy it at all... It was an interesting reading. Really. However, I felt as if this book was missing something.
The author spent most of the book retelling several Sherlock Holmes' cases, spicing them up with a paranormal twist, with the result that to the unfolding of each adventure was devoted only a few chapter span. And doing so, she sacrificed depth both in the worldbuilding and characters' development.
I felt as if it lacked a centre of gravity, a scope... While I was reading, I spent most of my time asking myself "Why did the author decide to write it this way?" (e.g. Why presenting so many cases without exploring or reinventing any of them in a more significant way? Why glossing over the Holmes and Watson - here Crow and Dr Doyle - motives and secrets?)

The book description promised an alternate Victorian London where angels rule and everyone lives in a constant fear of one of them falling, which would be like “a nuclear bomb in both the physical and metaphysical worlds”. Seldom has a description been so off. What it is, is a Sherlock Holmes retelling. I don’t like retellings and Sherlock Holmes retellings are the most tired of them all. If I’d known it was one, I probably would’ve skipped this, no matter how much I like the author.

This is basically a collection of Holmes’ most famous cases bound together with a superficial plot about Jack the Ripper—a case Holmes famously never tackled. There were some minor changes, but none of them made the stories truly fresh. The newness, therefore, rests solely on the world-building.

It’s an alternate Victorian London with everything. There are both steampunk elements, like airships and automatons, and all manner of supernatural creatures from vampires and werewolves to ghosts and hellhounds. And angels. There are three kinds of angels: those bound to a building and thus worthy of a name, the Nameless who wander about without a mind and purpose of their own, and the Fallen who are vicious creatures who kill and inflict supernatural diseases. We actually never meet the latter.

Holmes is an angel called Crow. He is different from other angels because he is not bound to a building, but isn’t a Nameless or a Fallen either—a fact that the author didn’t fully explain until about midway to the book, which left me constantly baffled with people’s reactions to him. He likes to solve crimes, and he is very good at deductive reasoning. Unlike Holmes, he doesn’t have any vices—he doesn’t even eat—or irritating habits, and he is actually very endearing in his constant awe of humanity.

Dr Watson is Dr Doyle who has survived an attack by a Fallen in Afghanistan and is suffering from the consequences, which will lead to a metamorphosis. Since the actual flavour of the change is kept as a secret for a while, I won't reveal it here. It plays some role in solving the cases; perhaps the only worthwhile alteration the author has made to the stories. The good doctor has another secret too, even more tightly guarded. Considering the importance given to it, I would’ve wished it actually had some sort of impact—it definitely would’ve opened the story to a whole new level—but it was glossed over and life went on like it didn’t even exist.

Considering the interesting world the author has created, it seems criminal that she’s wasted it on Sherlock Holmes. The angels had a fascinating society that could’ve formed a basis to a completely unique plot, and Crow had such an interesting backstory that he could’ve carried a book on that alone. The alterations don’t even really influence the original stories. It wasn’t until midway to the book that they started to have any effect on the cases, and the suspects remained ordinary humans in pretty much all of them.

This being said, I found the book interesting enough to keep reading. I even gave it four stars. The author has recreated the atmosphere of Conan-Doyle’s originals well, the narrative style works and never wavers, and I liked both Crow and Dr Doyle. If there’s ever a follow-up, I hope the author goes to town with the world and gives the two a proper plot and a unique story.

I was not expecting 'Sherlock Holmes meets Jack the Ripper' with the added twist of Holmes being an angel and Watson being a hell-hound, but that wasn't an unwelcome surprise – there's clear love and warmth in the pastiche, and there are plenty of clever twists on well-known tales. I did feel, though, that the book was over-long, and not as original or compelling as I wanted it to be, as someone who does love Holmes in all his iterations.