Night Watch: A Long-Lost Adventure in Which Sherlock Holmes Meets Father Brown

by Stephen Kendrick

In this brilliantly crafted pastiche, Stephen Kendrick brings Sherlock Holmes and Father Brown together in an unprecedented collaboration on a singularly shocking murder case.

It is Christmas Day, 1902, and a priest’s mutilated body has been found in a London church that is hosting a secret interfaith meeting to discuss the possibility of a Parliament of World Religions. A summons from the Prime Minister plunges Holmes into a case with international, political, and ecclesiastical complications. Untrampled snow surrounding the church suggests that the murderer remains within and that he is, presumably, one of the leaders of the world’s great faiths.

Throughout the night, as more deaths are discovered, Holmes and Dr. Watson follow one false lead after another. But with his legendary astuteness, Holmes manages to wrap the case up in less than twenty-four hours—or so it seems. Two weeks later, Father Brown, the meek young priest-translator, pays a call at Baker Street to reveal “a few loose ends.”

The intersection of religion and politics, faith and sin, enmity and forgiveness—these themes are subtly interwoven into this fast-paced mystery that is filled with classic intrigue.
(front foap)

Genres: Mystery, Fiction, Historical Mystery, Historical Fiction, Crime, British Literature, Detective

272 pages, Hardcover

First published November 13, 2001

Reviews

[Philip · Rating 3 out of 5]

It has to be said first, unfortunately, that this book is urgently in need of an edit and a redraft, to eliminate a whole boatload of clumsy repetition, continuity errors, unexamined Americanisms and failed attempts at Britishisms.

With that caveat, though, it's actually a very decent story, with an ingenious, mostly solid, crime plot, a highly original (if unlikely) scenario and some effective and convincing characterisation of Father Brown. The contrast between him and Holmes, and the types of story they appear in, is perceptively drawn out. Brown works well as a guest character in a story centring round the flamboyant Holmes, as he's a self-effacing presence in his own stories too, barely attracting attention until he starts dropping devastating truths.

Unfortunately the Holmes regulars are rather less well delineated -- Mycroft's attendance at the scene of the crime is out of character, for instance, but (as it turns out) thematically justified, and Kendrick doesn't seem to get Lestrade at all.

Most contentious is probably his depiction of Holmes as dissatisfied by his secular, rational worldview and seeking a more spiritual life. This could have been appalling (if in line with Conan Doyle's own forcible and unconvincing conversion of his other great intellectual, Professor Challenger, to Spiritualism in his late The Land of Mist)... but by rooting it in Holmes' Far Eastern travels, and setting it a decade later, shortly before the detective's retirement to keep bees in Sussex -- clearly a sign of some shift in his mentality -- Kendrick manages to make it sufficiently convincing for the purpose.

While this book demands a fair amount of forgiveness from its readers as well as its characters, I found my perseverance was rewarded.

[Stewart Sternberg · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stephen Kendrick is a fine writer and this is a solid locked room mystery. However, it would have been better had he created his own characters and not made this a pastiche. It doesn't work as a Holmes novel, although Kendrick has a nice sense of Victorian England and that famous protagonist.

[Terri · Rating 1 out of 5]

just because someone chooses to write about Holmes, doesn't mean they do it well. the author relies a lot upon adverbs, e.g.
"Whatever do you mean?" I ejaculated excitedly.
"The game's afoot," Holmes replied automatically.

OK, that's not really part of the book, because i'm too lazy to walk over and pick it up to quote from it, but it's certainly representative of his style. When compared with Laurie R. King's Mary Russell/Sherlock Holmes series, it pales in comparison.
I checked this out from the library, and will not finish it.

[Bettie · Rating 2 out of 5]

Condition: Used - Very Good
Sold by: prouk2 £0.32

The writing style is rather limp and the opening crime was of peurile construct. I shall give a little more of my time after my bath to see if the major crime come up to scratch.

ETA - erm no, duh-doe.

[Paula · Rating 3 out of 5]

A nice pastiche of the Sherlock Holmes mysteries. Narrated by Dr. Watson, it's a mostly in-house mystery, which I use to describe one that happens mostly in one room or building for the entire book. This one happens inside a cathedral with leaders of various religious faiths suspect of a grisly murder.

Due to the "in-house" nature of the mystery, the cathedral itself becomes a character. Kendrick supplies an illustration of the cathedral's basic layout so we can keep our left straight from our right whenever Holmes and Watson turn a corner here and go through dark hallways there.

THIS isn't a spoiler: The young Father Brown isn't the killer. Now I'll tell you why it's not a spoiler (or is this actually two spoilers, after all?). Some of us are also familiar with the G. K. Chesterton mystery series with that same Father Brown being a pest to the local constabulary. He injects himself into the murder case and finds answers before the police do. (BBC Home Entertainment created a television series of Father Brown mysteries for anyone interested.)

I found this author's version of a Holmes mystery enjoyable. There's nothing like Conan Doyle's writing, naturally, but I'd recommend this particular take-off with three stars going for it.

[Tom Donaghey · Rating 4 out of 5]

NIGHT WATCH (2001) by Stephen Kendrick islet another addition the the Sherlock Holmes reading list. This is a tale set around Christmas with two almost separate stories. The first is an aperitif to whet that palate. Holmes travels, along with Watson, to the home of one of his university masters to pass the holiday. While there a precious get is stolen from the church and it is up to Holmes to recover it, which he does handily.
Leaving the festivities early after being beckoned by the Prime Minister back to London. During a secret interfaith conference, the hosting priest is found murdered. The suspects are the eight other faith leaders or the three servants within the church. After the murder has been discovered the church is closed off by the police and the snow, which has been falling steadily for some hours prior to the murder, make it impossible for the killer to have escaped.
While this is not a fully satisfying Holmes tale, there is the intriguing inclusion of a small, quiet priest by the name of Father Brown that does make the book far more interesting.

[Mike · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a pretty, although unusual good pastiche. I am tempted to give it a full "4.0" (and by the time I complete this I may adjust that score.) It is a very focused story; what one might call a "locked room" type of mystery. The author has tackled the characters of Holmes and Watson in a way that definitely made it harder for him to satisfy those who enjoy the tales. And for that reason, I believe that having less "comfort" (like a familiar glove on your hand) in this story may be a necessary consequence of its goals.

In less oblique words, Sherlock and Watson are dragged into the scene of a murder. There they are faced with the apparent brutal killing of an Anglican clergyman by either one of three servants (all apparently devoted to the man) or by one of 7 (possibly 8) other accomplished religious men from other faiths in a church and attached residence. The scene is set in winter, during a snowstorm so that the police can avow that no footprints have disturbed the perimeter from the time the body was discovered. Because of diplomatic and ecclesiastic pressures, Holmes undertakes to solve the mystery within 14 hours (or so).

Being a religious man himself, the author has introduced both philosophic and religious themes as Holmes interrogates the various suspects and reviews the facts with Watson, his brother Mycroft, and Lestrade. Some of his deepest conversations are with another Anglican who is the representative of the Archbishop of Canterbury to this inter-denominational conclave that has brought the other religious men to London.

Given the short time frame and the critical nature of the inquiry, we see far less of the usual catchphrases and mannerisms that abound in Conan Doyle's and many other authors' tales. We get glimpses of it in a "framing story" that begins the novel, but the tone here is more serious than we often see in a SH mystery. Watson makes numerous insights into Holmes' thought processes and methods during the story. At this point in time they are supposed to have been friends for 30 years and Holmes is months away from retirement (and Watson to another marriage). The author makes Watson a more necessary part of Sherlock's life with even Mycroft commenting on it. Nigel Bruce he is not!

I would not recommend this book if you are a fan of "Father Brown". Although his character is brought into the story many times (and in several key ways), this is fundamentally a Sherlock Holmes mystery. If you are a SH fan but only like "easy" comfortable stories that adhere to the "official" canon, then you might be less satisfied than I. But, if you like to read well-planned and well-written stories that expand our knowledge of our literary friends, then I heartily recommend this book. (There, it's a four.)

[Pren Clair · Rating 1 out of 5]

1.5/5 oof. I struggled with this book. I loved the father brown mysteries. I’ve read a number of the shorter Sherlock tales and enjoyed them.

In this book You get the Holmes characters heavy hitters but they are all appallingly watered down. It would have been better to leave them out entirely. This book could have been a quarter shorter. By the last 25% I was only reading every other page and it still flowed seamlessly. I missed no plot points or character developments by doing this. Which to me means all those words I skipped were superfluous filler.

Father brown is kinda just drifting around till the last few chapters and is thrown in at the last minute. And that’s who I was really in this book for.

Over all. For a Sherlock book it felt too flowery and was really about the character change towards softness and religious questioning in his older years. I just don’t see the scientific Atheist that has been established in all these tales having a character change that big in his 50s.

The actual mystery was enjoyable, but essentially this is fan fiction. Take this character I like and bend him into the character I think he SHOULD have been. This is almost on par with shipping Draco and Hermione. GTFO with that noise.

[Lacey · Rating 5 out of 5]

In all fairness I am a Sherlock Holmes fan. Sometimes to the extreme. If you are fan of Arthur Conan Doyle than you will love this tale. No simple tale to be told. Even the famous Sherlock was frustrated and surprised to the very end. I have never read a story involving Father Brown. He too is a well-known character, from what I have gathered. One that will require some research. Initially, I believe this popped up on my Pintrist. It took some shopping online to find it. And if you find yourself in similar situation. The book is totally worth buying.

[Alton Motobu · Rating 2 out of 5]

Two and a half stars for potentially good plot but poorly written with too many adjectives and adverbs throughout which distract and detract from the story line. In addition, the author goes on too many tangents and digressions which add nothing to the story. Sherlock and Watson are the main actors; Father Brown has a minimal and insignificant role in the story until the final chapter in which he solves the crime instead of Sherlock! Sherlock's meticulous investigation and conclusions prove wrong.

[Antoinette · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's Christmas in London, 1902. The mutilated corpse of a priest is discovered in a London church, the site of a gathering of the world's religious leaders. Holmes,both Sherlock and Mycroft, along with Watson, converge on the scene to discover the killer before he can strike again. A young Father Brown is also on the scene, serving as a translator for a bishop. It's an all-male cast with the exception of two young damsels in distress. Lots of red herrings. An entertaining read.

[Sohang Chopra · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good detective novel, I can only complain that it wasn't longer 🙂. I liked this collaboration between the 2 fictional detectives. Most of the detective work is dominated by Sherlock Holmes, but Father Brown did play a crucial role especially at the very end (I only wish that his detective work was more on-screen instead of behind the scenes). Nevertheless I was satisfied as a fan of both Sherlock Holmes and Father Holmes.

[Jack Haringa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Enjoyable pastiche that leans heavily on Doyle's work more than Chesterton's. Got tired of seeing the same adjectives applied to Father Brown over and over (fat, portly, etc.) The author otherwise captured Watson's voice well.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Stephen Kendrick is a minister and he's written a fun mystery for Sherlock Holmes fans that includes tidbits about various religions and good couple of twists at the end. An enjoyable read.

[Kate Jackson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kendrick desperately needs a good editor, but the mystery itself was overall compelling. Worth reading, but could have been so much better.

[Janet Hamm · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good attempt, and I thought Father Brown was done pretty well (though I've read less Father Brown than Sherlock Holmes), but I was not convinced that the style was a good imitation of Conan Doyle's. More contractions than I think would be common for the period, and in any case, too many adverbs (and adjectives) and too much "was" kept pulling me out of the narrative.

[Adam Graham · Rating 3 out of 5]

What would happen if the immortal detectives, Sherlock Holmes and Father Brown met with a brutal murder to solve?

This is the fascinating question posed by Rev. Stephen Kendrick's 2001 Book, Night Watch. The plot of the story is that Sherlock's Holmes' brother, Mycroft, the British's government's most indispensible man as Sherlock Holmes described him, calls his younger brother in to investigate a murder. The rector of an Anglican Church is found dead in his church, with his body mutilated. The prime suspects: leaders of the world's major religions who'd gathered in Britain for some inter-religious dialog. Father Brown is serving as an interpreter for a visiting Italian Cardinal.

The murder and its solution are fantastic. However, the story is dragged down because of some errors in Kendrick's writing mechanics and also because Kendrick's story was frequently derailed from the story to Kendrick's religious agenda. In part, the book was written to back up Kendrick's assertions in Holy Clues: The Gospel According to Sherlock Holmes which seems to suggest that in Holmes later days in became someone who could best be described as "spiritual and not religious." Unfortunately, the author seemed to work too hard on this angle, which distracted from the main point that readers who weren't enthusiasts of Universalism picked up the for: a murder mystery.

Kendrick's treatment of Holmes, Watson, and Brown was good, but in places uneven. I found some of the conversations between Holmes and Watson not entirely believable and out of place in a mystery novel. Kendrick's Holmes was a cut below Doyle's in solving the case, and Kendrick tried a cheap out by simply saying that Doctor Watson's accounts had been exaggerated or unrealistic. To be fair, Kendrick is hardly the first author of a Holmes pastich to use that out. What Arthur Conan Doyle created in Holmes was a bit of a mental Superman, and like Superman it's very hard to come up with a worthy opponent for him. So, it's far easier to move the character closer to reality.

His portrayal of Brown, while not having the flair of G.K. Chesterton, and leaving the character a little flat was still essentially the same orthodox Catholic priest that readers have come to know and love. Given that Kendrick, as a Unitarian Universalist, comes from a completely different theological perspective than Chesterton, he deserves to be commended for not trying to tamper with the character, as some interpretations have tried to change Brown into their vision of what a Christian should be rather than the character Chesterton created.

Of course, in a two-detective story, one detective usually draws the short straw, and Brown clearly has the back seat to Holmes. However, in Chesterton's books, Brown off hung around in the background until coming forward to the solution to the crime.

Kendrick's deserves credit for the audacity of it all. He's the first author I know of to try and bring these giants of detecting onto the same stage. And he produces an interesting, albeit not completely satisfying tome. Here's hoping that others will follow Kendrick, and this isn't the last Holmes-Father Brown crossover we see.

[Gary Holt · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is almost worth reading just for the premise. But I did not find it to be a particularly good mystery--e.g., it violates some of the canons of mystery literature, like concealing key clues from the reader until the end. It also is mostly missing the interesting philosophical or theological reflections that Father Brown's stories are known for. And, in the end, it just was not as absorbing a mystery as the usual Holmes stories, or the better pastiches. On the whole, not bad, but did not live up to my (high) expectations. Hence, an "ok" rating.

[Anne · Rating 1 out of 5]

I got about halfway through this, and I kept picking at the details of it. The idea is that a murder has been committed at a secret gathering of representatives of a variety of faiths in London in 1902. Holmes is called in by his brother to investigate, and a very young Father Brown is there, acting as interpreter for the Vatican’s representative.

I can deal with the interfaith conference being heavy on the Christians (three out of seven) because, in that time and place, it would be, but… Who selected the rabbi who is attending? Who selected the Brahmin representing Hinduism? I’d give a pass on the Buddhist representative because it’s implied that he was selected because he was known to the Anglican minister who is hosting (but who did not help organize) the gathering, but… He’s supposed to be a Japanese monk and the head of a large Buddhist monastery in Japan. All the large Buddhist monasteries got dissolved by the Meiji government in the late 1860s/early 1870s. It seems peculiar that, thirty years later, there would be a community, in Japan, large enough to put someone forward to represent all Buddhists everywhere. I also tripped over the fact that Watson talked about his Methodist upbringing and then, six pages later, mentioned something offending his Church of England soul without any recognition in the text that those are two different things.

[Jc · Rating 2 out of 5]

The capture of the Holmes character is weak, Watson is barely there, Mycroft doesn't come close to the Doyle version (Father Brown barely makes a bumbling appearance). Okay... but does it stand up as a mystery? Not really -- it is a feeble version of a locked room mystery. Sure, you probably will not be able to guess who did it, but you might not really care that much either. It is obvious once the main story gets going (the preamble story is just dumb) that one of the clerics is not what he seems to be. Duh. The book is mostly an excuse for an American moderate church pastor to introduce the reader to some ideas from the field of comparative religion. However, even as that it doesn't quite work, as it is definitely "theology lite" and you will not learn anything except “why can’t we all just get along.” Heck, as an atheist I could write better and more inspirational religious literature than this in my sleep! In general, Night Watch is a bit more interesting than some other feeble attempts to mix Holmes and religion, but only barely. I think the book only holds some interest to those who are already into Holmes enough to read everything where the character pops up, such as yours truly.

[C.J. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well, I suppose it might rank a little higher than two out of five. Its depiction of Fr. Brown--as well as that of the ominous interior of a church entombing a murdered man and multiple suspects--is excellent. But where it loses its edge is in its portrayal Holmes--too soft by half, unable to catch the canon balance of pure intellectual asperity and humanity; and it loses THAT balance in its too blunt authorial agenda. Kendrick wants to pull out the mystery, he wants to pull out a dogmatic claim on Holmes's religious principles--not the lack or confusion thereof. Without the precarious suspense of NOT knowing, one loses in an interest in the Holmes side of the narrative at least. Fr. Brown remains a bit more of a mystery, and thus, a bit more of protagonist and a draw in the narrative.

[Ken B · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was a very well written Sherlock Holmes pastiche. I was a little put out at first by the thought that it was written by a Unitarian Church minister, thinking that it would be preachy and have a sentimental Holmes pondering his religious beliefs. But that ended up not being the case at all.

Representatives of the world's religions are drawn together for a conference when one of the hosts is found murdered. In a closed conference, only one of the attendees could be guilty. Due to political ramifications, Mycroft Holmes calls for the aid of Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson in solving this case and keeping it hush-hush. A young Father Brown is in attendance at the conference as a translator for the representative of the Vatican. The game is afoot!

4 STARS

[Tim Hicks · Rating 1 out of 5]

Bleah! Remind me to stick to books by professional authors. This steaming pile gets worse as you plow through it.

Our heroes get picked up in a Morris limousine in 1902. Nope.
Author/editor don't know "lead" from "led".

There are several occurrences of inappropriate hyphens where the text has presumably been reformatted from another version,

Holmes is uninspiring. Brown is dull. The various religious folks are cardboard. The plot is flimsy, and the final reveal from Brown to Holmes is the sort of thing you expect from 1900s vanity publishing, in which Lady Biffington decides to try her hand at writing a novel. What a load of bollocks!

This is weak tea and a waste of time. Pfui.

[N3Chap]

If you are looking for a comic-book knockabout tale from the tradition that gave us "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" and "Dracula Meets Frankenstein", this may be the book for you. But that is as far as this book goes in terms of style or authenticity.

It is filled with anachronisms, Americanisms and schoolboy errors (a train from Oxford to London would arrive at Paddington Station, not Euston, to give but one example). It is wholly unconvincing in its stated aim of being a "long-lost story" written by Dr John Watson.

It is a fun read however and I look forward to reading "Miss Marple meets Scooby Doo", which, I assume, will be it's sequel.

[Cindee · Rating 2 out of 5]

What a total waste of 8 months. Ha, not really, but it took me that long to finish this book. When you only read a few pages a day, time adds up. It was mildly interesting up until the end. Then it went lame and begged to be put out of its misery. Thankfully, the author ended its sad little life. The major AHA! was so convoluted that I had to wonder if Kendrick had a list of murderers/motives, put them in a jar and then reached in and picked one when he got to the part where mysteries usually do their reveals.

Don't waste your time. Srsly.

[Susan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Leading representatives of different faiths meet secretly in 1902 London to discuss a parliament of world religions. When the Anglican clergyman who is host of the gathering is found dead, Mycroft Holmes enlists is brother Sherlock to find the murderer--and quickly, before political implications rock the government. Among the attendees is an Italian cardinal, escorted by his translator and aide, Father Paul Brown. Holmes solves the mystery--or does he? A follow0-up visit from Brown throws an entirely different light on the case.

[Janell · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a long time fan of Sherlock Holmes and a new fan of Father Brown, I was excited to find a book that merged both detectives into one story. What a great idea! Unfortunately, although the mystery is fairly interesting, neither Holmes nor Father Brown really shine. Holmes is much too simplistic with very little depth and Father Brown mostly puts in just a cameo appearance here and there until the last couple of pages. Just OK.

[Cindy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this one. A group of religious leaders are meeting in London for an interfaith conference when the host is brutally murdered. The meeting of Sherlock Holmes and Father Brown sounds odd, but it works pretty well given the setting. Better than some of the other "Holmes" books I've read.

[Eric · Rating 2 out of 5]

Meh. It was mostly Watson and Sherlock with only a little of Father Brown. The pace of the writing was kind of slow for the story, which takes place in a single night. I guess I expected too much from the author. No one is going to match Chesterton's masterful prose or Doyle's antiquated charm.

[Mckinnus · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love Father Brown and can't get enough of Sherlock Holmes, so I am hoping this combination is a great one. This was very good. It was quited interesting. Although it did not have the complete sound of a Holmes mystery, it was close enough.