I had to take a few days to think about this one for a little bit -- and to decide exactly what my rating for it would be.
This was my second read in my "Holmes vs. Jack the Ripper" reading project, after Lyndsay Faye's seriously remarkable "Dust and Shadow." As I said in my "Dust and Shadow" review, Faye's book was so good that it really set the mark by which I knew I'd be measuring all other Holmes-vs.-Ripper stories that followed, and I don't expect any others to ever top her efforts. I was intrigued by this book, however, if only because a book entitled, "The _Last_ Sherlock Holmes Story" implied that there really would be an ending with as big of a twist as the book jacket summary promised.
One of the most obvious differentiations of the various Holmes-vs.-Ripper stories is who the different authors choose as the identity of Jack the Ripper. As I've been gradually amassing volumes in my Holmes-vs.-Ripper collection (I've only three so far, but there's lots of others out there waiting for me), I'd begun to wonder, somewhat idly, if any brave and innovative author might take a stab at the ultimate blasphemy and have the Ripper revealed to be either Watson, or Holmes himself. It would be both wildly out-of-character AND character-destroying at the same time, sure. But in terms of twist endings, it wouldn't get much twistier than that -- and, while that is a _terrible_ reason to insert a twist ending into a story if it's your _only_ reason, it still left me wondering if any author would ever try this particular twist.
"The Last Sherlock Holmes Story" operates on the premise that Arthur Conan Doyle (referred to as "ACD") was a medical friend of Dr. Watson's who received permission from Watson to novelize Watson's and Holmes's adventures for the reading public. This story, however, is supposedly the only one written by Watson himself -- meaning that Dibdin allows himself a loophole as to why his writing and tone may sound different from that of Conan Doyle's. (This is somewhat unnecessary, in my opinion, as Dibdin did a fair job at capturing the voice of Watson -- but it's an appropriate twist in other regards, so I still saw it as a nice touch.) It also explains why this manuscript, "discovered" for the first time decades after Watson's death, was never published in the original "ACD" series -- Watson hid it away for being so shocking and damning.
The first half of the book is great fun. Commentary from Holmes on both ACD's "adaptations," and on the general effectiveness of Scotland Yard, is entertaining and humorous -- serving as a nice relief from the terrible crimes of Jack the Ripper which Holmes and Watson are brought in to explore. As the story continues, Holmes finally names, to Watson, Holmes's suspect for the Ripper's real identity: Professor James Moriarty.
Making Moriarty into the Ripper was a neat idea, I thought, and one tact I hadn't considered a Holmes-vs-Ripper might take. Except, of course, it's not Moriarty who is behind the murders. Moriarty, it's revealed, is a product of Holmes's mind, as the Great Detective loses his grip on his sanity. There is no Professor Moriarty. Moriarty is only a figment of Holmes's imagination. The Ripper murderer is Holmes himself.
Man, how I _struggled_ with figuring out my reaction to this book! And it wasn't even so much that the book reveals that Holmes is the Ripper -- I was so sure the story could take any direction that nothing really _shocked_ me in terms of plot developments. Rather, it was _how_ we find out that Holmes is the Ripper. Watson discovers that Holmes is the Ripper when Watson discovers Holmes _in the act_ -- terribly mutilating the body of Mary Kelly in her own single room. (If you know anything about the Ripper killings, you know that Kelly suffered the worst carnage of any of the victims.) It was a sickening passage to read, and the only thing that kept me from tossing the book away after reading that passage was that it had taken me a month to get this far into it (I haven't had a lot of time to read lately) and I was determined to finish the thing off that close to the end. Lemme tell you, though, it was a near thing. But I keep reading till the end.
Am I glad I stuck it out?
Look: Sherlock Holmes is, I think, fairly-objectively speaking, pretty much the most famous, and most beloved, fictional character that we've got. Millions of fans love him. Billions of people at least know who he is. There's no other fictional character in second place. And I think one primary reason for that is, as one Holmesian put it, the fact that Sherlock Holmes is the original super hero. He often takes justice into his own hands when the law simply would not suffice. Having Holmes turn out to be Jack the Ripper is sort of like having Superman turn out to be the Unabomber. It just goes against everything the character stands for, everything the character IS -- everything the character _means_.
But I said I liked the book. Why?
Because of the last two pages. The premise of this book isn't just that Holmes is Jack the Ripper; it's that Holmes is slipping into insanity, manifesting itself as a sort of duel identity. He's not an evil criminal mastermind who has been evil all along and has set up his whole career as a front to allow him to avoid suspicion while he goes on his reign of terror. He's losing his mind; the crimes are not the fault of "our" Holmes. It's no more "our" Holmes's fault for Moriarty's Ripper crimes than it's Dr. Jekyll's fault for Mr. Hyde's rampages. (... I assume; I've actually never read "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde.") Moriarty is the insane side of Holmes, but it's insanity only, and not who Holmes actually IS.
Or at least, I could read it that way -- since I did feel that one place where the author dropped the ball a bit was in not having Watson spend more time realizing that his friend had gone insane and was no longer himself. Watson is so horrified (understandably, true) that he doesn't spend any real time going, "... I've lost my friend to an unhealable insanity, this is terrible," but rather seems to be more of the mindset of, "... I can't believe I know a murderer; I've got to follow him to keep him from doing any more harm." There wasn't quite enough emotion there for me.
At least, not until the last two pages, when a deranged Holmes is standing on the cliffs of Reichenbach Falls, convinced that Dr. Watson, there beside him, is actually Moriarty in disguise. Holmes is about to kill Watson with a knife when Watson says, "Fine, kill me. But if you do, you'll be doing exactly what Moriarty wants you to do. You'll be killing your only friend. Moriarty will have won." And Holmes, instead of killing Watson, looks at him sadly before declaring, "Don't worry, he won't hurt you. I won't let him hurt you," before Holmes throws himself off the cliff and into the Reichenbach Falls.
And, man, I couldn't NOT love an ending like that. As someone for whom the Holmes and Watson friendship is the cornerstone of my love for all things Sherlockian, even a story that damages the essential goodness and compassion of Sherlock Holmes in order to provide a big twist ending is going to win me back when Holmes reclaims that goodness and compassion to save his dearest friend. Be it a flesh-and-blood Moriarty, or Holmes's own insanity, nothing can destroy the friendship between Holmes and Watson.
So -- this book is not as lovely or as well-crafted as Faye's "Dust and Shadows." (Speaking of craft: I should note that the narrative of "The Last Sherlock Holmes Story" definitely drags in parts, as whole sections are comprised of Watson's musings without anything actually, y'know, HAPPENING. But this is a fairly short read, so I could forgive it for dragging in some places.) Not as strong a story, either, because you have to damage the character in order for the premise to even exist.
However: damage the character, yes. But, with an ending this powerful, Dibdin is not destroying him. Sherlock Holmes is loyal to Dr. Watson till the end, meaning this "Fight-Club"-esque Holmes tale is another Holmes-vs.-Ripper story that is going to stick with me for some time to come.