What do you think?
Rate this book
A.J. Raffles, The Gentleman Thief #1
The Amateur Cracksman
This book was converted from its physical edition to the digital format by a community of volunteers. You may find it for free on the web. Purchase of the Kindle edition includes wireless delivery.
220 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1898
261 people are currently reading
3255 people want to read
About the author
E.W. Hornung
379 books80 followersErnest William Hornung known as Willie, was an English author, most famous for writing the Raffles series of novels about a gentleman thief in late Victorian London.
In addition to his novels and short stories Hornung wrote some war verse, and a play based on the Raffles stories was produced successfully. He was much interested in cricket, and was "a man of large and generous nature, a delightful companion and conversationalist".
In addition to his novels and short stories Hornung wrote some war verse, and a play based on the Raffles stories was produced successfully. He was much interested in cricket, and was "a man of large and generous nature, a delightful companion and conversationalist".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 353 reviews
December 27, 2012
the idea of raffles, the gentleman thief, obverse of the legendary sherlock holmes, gentleman detective (the creation of hornung's esteemed brother-in-law arthur conan doyle), thrills me. and i can't say i don't normally adore the idea of working outside the law to balance the scales of justice -- i watch timothy hutton's modern-day robin hood crew on leverage as often as possible. there is no doubt that raffles is in some ways the progenitor of this type of character but in reading the book i realized the only redress was being made to "the cracksman"'s pocket. before reading this collection of stories, i had visions of hutton's character nate ford, and the great french character arsène lupin or baroness orczy's scarlett pimpernel but instead found raffles anticipating leopold and loeb:
"A matter of opinion, my dear Bunny; I don't mean it for rot. I've told you before that the biggest man alive is the man who's committed a murder, and not yet been found out; at least he ought to be, but he so very seldom has the soul to appreciate himself. Just think of it! Think of coming here and talking to the men, very likely about the murder itself; and knowing you've done it; and wondering how they'd look if they knew! Oh, it would be great, simply great!" - from "Wilful Murder"
much has been made of the fact that raffles has a code -- he does not murder; he only steals when he has need. as it turns out raffles doesn't actually subscribe to the code he lays out -- he seems to make excuses for lapses of conduct often, perhaps revealing how little it means -- see the story quoted above for a revision of his "no murder" rule, or "A Costume Piece" for how he decides to go ahead with a robbery which won't alleviate his financial constraints but simply for the challenge. it would seem that the victorians would identify with the idea that crime was understandable if it prevented one from quitting their "rightful" sphere, and for those who stood a high moral ground hornung introduced the misgivings of bunny (his sidekick and former fag at public school) as a balance to raffles' complete lack of ethics.
as members of the unmonied upper class, both raffles and bunny are part of Society and are terrified to lose their standing (though not so much so that they quit the gambling and the tailors that have brought them low) in the class system they so adore. but when i shake it out, all i can see is that raffles is a dated sociopath cricket player, who will not quit his sphere despite his inability to afford it and is a relic of the deep divide in classes as much as cricket and the public school system. i was woefully misapprehended regarding the character of raffles -- i expected that this much ballyhooed code was real, that raffles' choices might result from some reflection, be difficult to arrive at, or borne of something i could more easily identify with, instead i found him to be a character completely ingrained in the class system: entitled, selfish, and grasping. i don't say that this makes raffles less of an interesting character but he's no raskolnikov either. i don't feel any sense of conflict or even engagement when he embarks on a plan, or a concern for his well-being because his motivations don't mean a thing to me -- or to him, either, it seems. his friend bunny is the loyal dimwit who assists him in schemes which brings me to what i liked least about the raffles stories: the mode in which the action is delivered.
in the majority of these stories raffles conceives of a plan of action and does not share its details with bunny. we are then left to hear him relate to bunny the plan after the fact, an issue that bunny himself points out:
"Then you should have let me know when you did decide. You lay your plans, and never say a word, and expect me to tumble to them by light of nature. How was I to know you had anything on?"
i really didn't like this device at all and the revelation of the plan was never so exciting or elaborate in the recitation that i gave up my resentment. i found the structure of the stories boring -- a lot of exposition, and when they are actually engaged in action it's often of a boring sort: for example, in one tale, bunny is awakened to sounds of a struggle and tasked with holding a suspect while the scotland yard detective who has nabbed the competitor thief goes after the others. bunny stands there holding the suspect. there's a lot of talk. he holds him some more. hooey! hold me back from this gripping story!
i can say i found his prose very clean, and the dialogue charming -- just overused in exposition. i was going to give the book only two stars but seeing as it gave me lots to think about in terms of what not to do with structure and characterization, and really is the precursor to so many other gentleman thieves that i am in debt to hornung for his contribution to the archetype, and so the collection gets three stars on those merits though i don't know how long that shall stick.
N.B. before anybody takes my analysis of raffles and his lack of morals as evidence that i just don't like books with amoral characters, i'll say when reading this i thought of how much more i loved bertie woosters attempts at stealing a cow creamer, o. henry's pastiche of shamrock jolnes, not to mention his tales of burglars and thieves, and how engaged i was in Perfume: The Story of a Murderer despite the repugnance of the main character.
bonus review material for the literary detectives out there: the george orwell essay that is quoted liberally whenever raffles is discussed is actually a comparative book review he wrote in 1944. it is available online here: http://orwell.ru/library/reviews/chas...
i myself appreciated the opportunity to read orwell's commentary on raffles in context -- most of the time only a line or two is referenced, and usually makes it seem like orwell thought hornung a genius. on my own reading, i see that orwell did find interest in raffles relationship to english society especially in his relationship to cricket, and that he liked the book more than the one he was comparing it to. it seems to me that he thought the book good for its small lights, and was not quite as overpowered by it as critical essays and reviews who cite him would have one believe. :)
"A matter of opinion, my dear Bunny; I don't mean it for rot. I've told you before that the biggest man alive is the man who's committed a murder, and not yet been found out; at least he ought to be, but he so very seldom has the soul to appreciate himself. Just think of it! Think of coming here and talking to the men, very likely about the murder itself; and knowing you've done it; and wondering how they'd look if they knew! Oh, it would be great, simply great!" - from "Wilful Murder"
much has been made of the fact that raffles has a code -- he does not murder; he only steals when he has need. as it turns out raffles doesn't actually subscribe to the code he lays out -- he seems to make excuses for lapses of conduct often, perhaps revealing how little it means -- see the story quoted above for a revision of his "no murder" rule, or "A Costume Piece" for how he decides to go ahead with a robbery which won't alleviate his financial constraints but simply for the challenge. it would seem that the victorians would identify with the idea that crime was understandable if it prevented one from quitting their "rightful" sphere, and for those who stood a high moral ground hornung introduced the misgivings of bunny (his sidekick and former fag at public school) as a balance to raffles' complete lack of ethics.
as members of the unmonied upper class, both raffles and bunny are part of Society and are terrified to lose their standing (though not so much so that they quit the gambling and the tailors that have brought them low) in the class system they so adore. but when i shake it out, all i can see is that raffles is a dated sociopath cricket player, who will not quit his sphere despite his inability to afford it and is a relic of the deep divide in classes as much as cricket and the public school system. i was woefully misapprehended regarding the character of raffles -- i expected that this much ballyhooed code was real, that raffles' choices might result from some reflection, be difficult to arrive at, or borne of something i could more easily identify with, instead i found him to be a character completely ingrained in the class system: entitled, selfish, and grasping. i don't say that this makes raffles less of an interesting character but he's no raskolnikov either. i don't feel any sense of conflict or even engagement when he embarks on a plan, or a concern for his well-being because his motivations don't mean a thing to me -- or to him, either, it seems. his friend bunny is the loyal dimwit who assists him in schemes which brings me to what i liked least about the raffles stories: the mode in which the action is delivered.
in the majority of these stories raffles conceives of a plan of action and does not share its details with bunny. we are then left to hear him relate to bunny the plan after the fact, an issue that bunny himself points out:
"Then you should have let me know when you did decide. You lay your plans, and never say a word, and expect me to tumble to them by light of nature. How was I to know you had anything on?"
i really didn't like this device at all and the revelation of the plan was never so exciting or elaborate in the recitation that i gave up my resentment. i found the structure of the stories boring -- a lot of exposition, and when they are actually engaged in action it's often of a boring sort: for example, in one tale, bunny is awakened to sounds of a struggle and tasked with holding a suspect while the scotland yard detective who has nabbed the competitor thief goes after the others. bunny stands there holding the suspect. there's a lot of talk. he holds him some more. hooey! hold me back from this gripping story!
i can say i found his prose very clean, and the dialogue charming -- just overused in exposition. i was going to give the book only two stars but seeing as it gave me lots to think about in terms of what not to do with structure and characterization, and really is the precursor to so many other gentleman thieves that i am in debt to hornung for his contribution to the archetype, and so the collection gets three stars on those merits though i don't know how long that shall stick.
N.B. before anybody takes my analysis of raffles and his lack of morals as evidence that i just don't like books with amoral characters, i'll say when reading this i thought of how much more i loved bertie woosters attempts at stealing a cow creamer, o. henry's pastiche of shamrock jolnes, not to mention his tales of burglars and thieves, and how engaged i was in Perfume: The Story of a Murderer despite the repugnance of the main character.
bonus review material for the literary detectives out there: the george orwell essay that is quoted liberally whenever raffles is discussed is actually a comparative book review he wrote in 1944. it is available online here: http://orwell.ru/library/reviews/chas...
i myself appreciated the opportunity to read orwell's commentary on raffles in context -- most of the time only a line or two is referenced, and usually makes it seem like orwell thought hornung a genius. on my own reading, i see that orwell did find interest in raffles relationship to english society especially in his relationship to cricket, and that he liked the book more than the one he was comparing it to. it seems to me that he thought the book good for its small lights, and was not quite as overpowered by it as critical essays and reviews who cite him would have one believe. :)
July 5, 2021
January 2011
Good news, Americans! You don't have to know anything about cricket to read and enjoy this!
Meet A. J. Raffles: gentleman, independent bachelor, London man-about-town, champion cricketeer--er, cricketman--I mean, player-of-cricket--and...thief? Surely not! Surely so: how else could this gentleman of leisure afford to play poor man's baseball--I mean, cricket, sorry--whenever he likes? One must make money somehow, God wot, and Raffles' way is only slightly more dishonest than others. In this first volume of the Raffles Series (which hasn't been easy to find, let me tell you), Raffles, along with Harry "Bunny" Mander, his former public school chum and current partner in crime, commits astonishing acts of burglary across London and beyond. Lock up your diamonds! Hide your jewels! Raffles is in town!
(Seriously, guys, someone is going to have to explain this cricket thing)
I think I'm afraid to read Sherlock Holmes. Why else would I keep tiptoeing around those stories? First it was the Brigadier Gerard stories (by Arthur Conan Doyle, no less) last month, and now this book--by Doyle's brother-in-law. I have my eye on the Flashman stories next. When am I going to quit these crime-and-adventure stories and settle for the great detective? Hard to say. Soon, though. Soonish. Eventually.
See also: The Collected Raffles
Good news, Americans! You don't have to know anything about cricket to read and enjoy this!
Meet A. J. Raffles: gentleman, independent bachelor, London man-about-town, champion cricketeer--er, cricketman--I mean, player-of-cricket--and...thief? Surely not! Surely so: how else could this gentleman of leisure afford to play poor man's baseball--I mean, cricket, sorry--whenever he likes? One must make money somehow, God wot, and Raffles' way is only slightly more dishonest than others. In this first volume of the Raffles Series (which hasn't been easy to find, let me tell you), Raffles, along with Harry "Bunny" Mander, his former public school chum and current partner in crime, commits astonishing acts of burglary across London and beyond. Lock up your diamonds! Hide your jewels! Raffles is in town!
(Seriously, guys, someone is going to have to explain this cricket thing)
I think I'm afraid to read Sherlock Holmes. Why else would I keep tiptoeing around those stories? First it was the Brigadier Gerard stories (by Arthur Conan Doyle, no less) last month, and now this book--by Doyle's brother-in-law. I have my eye on the Flashman stories next. When am I going to quit these crime-and-adventure stories and settle for the great detective? Hard to say. Soon, though. Soonish. Eventually.
See also: The Collected Raffles
February 6, 2017
Raffles and Bunny are two young gentlemen with large debts and no desire to work for a living. They turn to crime, specifically burglary, to continue to live their lives of idle luxury. The stories are clearly inspired by and partially parodies of the Sherlock Holmes stories. Raffles is cold, logical, and nigh-superhuman. Bunny is dim enough that the reader gets the pleasure of knowing more than he does and sniggering at all that he misses. It's got some casual racism typical of its time, and no female characters to speak of. The burglaring adventures themselves are fine, neither fab nor terrible; the real pleasure for me was the insight into a mindset and setting that seem fascinatingly alien. Plus I enjoy the almost abject, dog-like devotion with which Bunny views Raffles. The only thing I really didn't like was I'm not here for your bad attempt at poetry, Hornung, I'm here for Victorian gentlemen behaving badly and acting deeply in love with each other!
May 24, 2024
I read this book about 3 years ago and have reread the stories in it over the last 2 days.
I have always been fascinated by stories of gentleman thieves, but except for having seen an old black and white film with David Niven and Olivia De Havilland from 1939, I had never heard of Raffle.
I found this book by chance and since it was super discounted I grabbed it immediately. Wow, how lucky, it was a nice breath of joy.
It has been a great read, each story very quick to read, light and ironic.
The main character, a gentleman thief, not only is fascinating but could also be a magnificent character in a contemporary adventure book or in a TV series suitable for the whole family.
So if work keeps you too busy and you don't have too much time to focus on a longer and more challenging read, this little book will relieve all your stress.
The set is Victorian-era London. The two characters ( yes , actually we have a couple of main characters) Raffle and Bunny love a comfortable and luxurious life but they don't like working that much, so their choice is theft.
The couple is the usual cliché: one very intelligent and full of charm, the other a little clumsier and less skilled, but always a very good friend and a good supporting shoulder for the first one.
As I said, it's the usual cliché of books and films of all time, but they know the same way how to steal your heart.
I liked all the stories, only the last one left me a little sad... but I can't tell you anything otherwise I would ruin your enjoyment of reading.
A nice curiosity is that the author, EW Hornung, was the brother-in-law of none other than Arthur Conan Doyle (author of Sherlock Holmes and his trusted Dr. Watson).
Thank you for reading my opinion and if you found any errors in my text, please forgive me, English is not my native language.
I have always been fascinated by stories of gentleman thieves, but except for having seen an old black and white film with David Niven and Olivia De Havilland from 1939, I had never heard of Raffle.
I found this book by chance and since it was super discounted I grabbed it immediately. Wow, how lucky, it was a nice breath of joy.
It has been a great read, each story very quick to read, light and ironic.
The main character, a gentleman thief, not only is fascinating but could also be a magnificent character in a contemporary adventure book or in a TV series suitable for the whole family.
So if work keeps you too busy and you don't have too much time to focus on a longer and more challenging read, this little book will relieve all your stress.
The set is Victorian-era London. The two characters ( yes , actually we have a couple of main characters) Raffle and Bunny love a comfortable and luxurious life but they don't like working that much, so their choice is theft.
The couple is the usual cliché: one very intelligent and full of charm, the other a little clumsier and less skilled, but always a very good friend and a good supporting shoulder for the first one.
As I said, it's the usual cliché of books and films of all time, but they know the same way how to steal your heart.
I liked all the stories, only the last one left me a little sad... but I can't tell you anything otherwise I would ruin your enjoyment of reading.
A nice curiosity is that the author, EW Hornung, was the brother-in-law of none other than Arthur Conan Doyle (author of Sherlock Holmes and his trusted Dr. Watson).
Thank you for reading my opinion and if you found any errors in my text, please forgive me, English is not my native language.
April 3, 2025
Stylish, witty, recklessly entertaining, yet also satirical and, as evidenced in the last chapter, even serious and solemn, these stories, forming the saga of the cocksure and charming A.J Raffles, gentleman thief and dainty cricketer, and his equally memorable, if less sure-footed, accomplice Bunny Manders, make for some truly enjoyable and exhilarating reading. Hornung, who seems to have been influenced, if only loosely, by his more well-known brother-in-law Arthur Conan Doyle, proves to be no less of a compelling, imaginative and potent storyteller in his own right and these stories of villainy, revenge, daredevil courage and even martial glory deserve to be discovered and reappraised all over again.
September 10, 2015
An utterly delightful romp; more fun than Holmes.
January 25, 2018
bunny is definitely in love with raffles.
October 9, 2019
The embodiment of fin de siècle decadence, dashing A. J. Raffles artfully commits crime for crime’s sake. Bored with life as a master cricketer, Raffles turns to a life of crime to stifle his ennui – and pad his purse. His conscience-bitten sidekick, Bunny, accompanies him as he burgles Victorian London’s rogues, ruthless, and “rich and undeserving.” In the eight short stories that make up Raffles, the Amateur Cracksman (1899), E. W. Hornung creates an anti-Sherlock Holmes – a character who finds as much pleasure in planning and executing a crime as Holmes does in solving the case. Patriotic, true to his peers, ever a gentleman – and almost completely unburdened by religious morals or compunctions – Raffles in many ways stands as a literary model for the twentieth century’s debonair yet unscrupulous spy. If you enjoy Sherlock Holmes or James Bond, or if you’re looking for Edmund Backhouse’s inspiration, put another lump on the grate and crack open Raffles.
August 9, 2021
This has never come across my radar before, but decided to give it a go. Horning was directly inspired by the success of his bother-in-law Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories, and Raffles neatly inverts the Holmes formula - Raffles is a cricket-playing gentleman jewel thief and his sidekick “Bunny” writes up the capers. Both enjoy a whirl of leisure and fun as supposedly wealthy young Bachelors about late Empire London, whilst stealing jewels to fund their lifestyle.
Like the Holmes/Watson chronicles, there is supposed to be a lot of queer subtext, but honestly, there’s not. Quite a few very dodgy social attitudes on display (1899), so be warned. But if you can overlook that, this is an entertaining read. Hornung does well to keep each tale fresh and original, not relying on predetermined tropes, and his characterisation of the leads is good.
Like the Holmes/Watson chronicles, there is supposed to be a lot of queer subtext, but honestly, there’s not. Quite a few very dodgy social attitudes on display (1899), so be warned. But if you can overlook that, this is an entertaining read. Hornung does well to keep each tale fresh and original, not relying on predetermined tropes, and his characterisation of the leads is good.
May 6, 2022
This is a fun collection of inter-connected short stories. I want to emphasize the inter-connected part because they come almost-but-not-quite to the level of a novel rather than feeling like short stories. One story leads to another. Otto Penzler's introduction to this edition says: It has been speculated that E. W. Hornung (1866–1921), Arthur Conan Doyle’s brother-in-law, created Raffles, the greatest rogue in literature, to tweak the nose of the creator of the greatest detective in literature. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to agree that A.J. Raffles is the "greatest rogue" in literature, but he likely should be grouped in a top ten!
A.J. Raffles is a thief. The title calls him an amateur, but it seemed to me he had no means of support other than his thievery. Wouldn't that make him a professional? Oh, not in his mind! In one story he is distinctly dismissive of the professional thieves also on the scene. In that story Raffles, a star cricket player, and his friend Bunny, have been invited to a week-long competition where are also gathered some very wealthy and jewel laden cricket players and enthusiasts. We know Raffle's mental wheels are turning. Will the planned heist be successful? Ok, these are not mysteries. The how rather than the who is what keeps one reading.
I liked knowing the relationship between the author of these stories and the author of the Sherlock Homes stories. I enjoyed all of the stories, but this is far from literature. For enjoyment only, this just does leap across the 3/4-star line.
A.J. Raffles is a thief. The title calls him an amateur, but it seemed to me he had no means of support other than his thievery. Wouldn't that make him a professional? Oh, not in his mind! In one story he is distinctly dismissive of the professional thieves also on the scene. In that story Raffles, a star cricket player, and his friend Bunny, have been invited to a week-long competition where are also gathered some very wealthy and jewel laden cricket players and enthusiasts. We know Raffle's mental wheels are turning. Will the planned heist be successful? Ok, these are not mysteries. The how rather than the who is what keeps one reading.
I liked knowing the relationship between the author of these stories and the author of the Sherlock Homes stories. I enjoyed all of the stories, but this is far from literature. For enjoyment only, this just does leap across the 3/4-star line.
March 19, 2021
Two queer, bohemian victorian thieves stealing from the unlawfully rich to live away from society? Sign me up!
The history of these stories is, in itself, quite telling: written by Arthur Conan Doyle's brother-in-law, they were made to be a "dark reflection" of the detective and his faithful doctor: instead of siding with the law, they make their own and follow a life of crime.
But, even then, the result was far from dark. We do not find two murderers, or violent criminals. Instead, the result is rather closer to Oscar Wilde turned thief.
The characters are young, and quite lacking in experience: more than once they find themselves improvising, in trouble, or way out of their depth. And, more than once, they end up saving each other. They are truly loyal, lovers of art and beauty. They are brave, honourable, and, above all, true sportsmen.
It's a truly heartwarming read, and I can't but recommend it with all my soul.
The history of these stories is, in itself, quite telling: written by Arthur Conan Doyle's brother-in-law, they were made to be a "dark reflection" of the detective and his faithful doctor: instead of siding with the law, they make their own and follow a life of crime.
But, even then, the result was far from dark. We do not find two murderers, or violent criminals. Instead, the result is rather closer to Oscar Wilde turned thief.
The characters are young, and quite lacking in experience: more than once they find themselves improvising, in trouble, or way out of their depth. And, more than once, they end up saving each other. They are truly loyal, lovers of art and beauty. They are brave, honourable, and, above all, true sportsmen.
It's a truly heartwarming read, and I can't but recommend it with all my soul.
January 16, 2019
Well enough written but absolutely mind-numbing. Raffles is a dick and Bunny is caught in his headlights.
Written as an anti-hero with his brother-in-law's real hero in sight (Holmes), I can only suggest he failed miserably to redress the balance.
Written as an anti-hero with his brother-in-law's real hero in sight (Holmes), I can only suggest he failed miserably to redress the balance.
November 1, 2025
Almost better than sherlock holmes!
May 22, 2021
be gay do crimes
October 29, 2017
A.J. Raffles periodically re-surfaces as a classic character of popular fiction, and just as quickly drops out of sight again, exactly as E.W. Hornung frequently describes him doing in the 26 short stories and single novel that he devoted to Raffles - about half the output that Arthur Conan Doyle produced about Sherlock Holmes. Hornung, famously, was married to Conan Doyle's sister, and patterned his stories of the gentleman thief and champion cricketer Raffles, and his sidekick Bunny Mander, after the Holmesian example, while inverting the moral system. Conan Doyle was flattered and praised the stories, but was also troubled by them: "You must not make the criminal a hero."
Of course, it's exactly this inversion that has always provided Raffles' fascination. Should we root for him or not? Hornung comes up with ways for us to do so rather painlessly, but still, it's a dicey business. Each new Raffles story you read raises the issue all over again, and that, obviously, is an awfully good fictional hook.
The Raffles - Bunny relationship is also, in a different sense, "inverted" - a whole lot gayer than the Holmes - Watson partnership. Hornung was friendly with Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas, and is said to have based his duo partly on them. In the first Raffles story, "The Ides of March," a distinctly down-on-his-luck Bunny Mander is actually contemplating suicide over some gambling debts, but his old schoolmate Raffles persuades him that criminality is sometimes a better course of action than giving into depression. To become Raffles' partner-in-crime for the rest of the series, Bunny has to get off on shared improper behavior, and boy does he:
I'll do it again...I will...I'll lend you a hand as often as you like! What does it matter now? I've been in it once. I'll be in it again. I've gone to the devil anyhow. I can't go back, and wouldn't if I could. Nothing matters another rap! When you want me I'm your man.
If no sexual interpretation occurs to you while you are reading that, you have a cleaner mind than mine.
The first 16 Raffles stories were collected in two volumes of eight stories apiece, The Amateur Cracksman (1899) and The Black Mask (1901). Wordsworth Classics reprinted all these in one volume, Raffles: The Amateur Cracksman, in 1994, and it was in this form that I read and was delighted by them.
These first two volumes of Raffles stories are decidedly different, because at the end of the first, Raffles disappears and Bunny is packed off to prison. Their adventures after their reunion in the second collection cannot have the same carefree tone as before, and indeed do not, a fact that some decried as a diminution of the original impulse, but which I simply read as fictional development. Things have to happen in stories, as in life, and in good fictional series, the author follows through on the consequences of them happening.
Raffles comes to a rather improbable glorious end fighting in the Boer War in the last of these 16 stories, and when Hornung decided to revive the character with 10 more stories in A Thief in the Night in 1905, and a single novel Mr. Justice Raffles in 1909, he didn't "bring him back to life" a la Conan Doyle's "The Adventure of the Empty House," but set the stories in a period before Raffles' demise a la The Hound of the Baskervilles.
Raffles has been incarnated by at least 13 actors on screen and television, including John Barrymore, Ronald Colman, and David Niven. Anyone who can play elegant-but-larcenous has been eligible. Cary Grant would have worked.
Of course, it's exactly this inversion that has always provided Raffles' fascination. Should we root for him or not? Hornung comes up with ways for us to do so rather painlessly, but still, it's a dicey business. Each new Raffles story you read raises the issue all over again, and that, obviously, is an awfully good fictional hook.
The Raffles - Bunny relationship is also, in a different sense, "inverted" - a whole lot gayer than the Holmes - Watson partnership. Hornung was friendly with Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas, and is said to have based his duo partly on them. In the first Raffles story, "The Ides of March," a distinctly down-on-his-luck Bunny Mander is actually contemplating suicide over some gambling debts, but his old schoolmate Raffles persuades him that criminality is sometimes a better course of action than giving into depression. To become Raffles' partner-in-crime for the rest of the series, Bunny has to get off on shared improper behavior, and boy does he:
I'll do it again...I will...I'll lend you a hand as often as you like! What does it matter now? I've been in it once. I'll be in it again. I've gone to the devil anyhow. I can't go back, and wouldn't if I could. Nothing matters another rap! When you want me I'm your man.
If no sexual interpretation occurs to you while you are reading that, you have a cleaner mind than mine.
The first 16 Raffles stories were collected in two volumes of eight stories apiece, The Amateur Cracksman (1899) and The Black Mask (1901). Wordsworth Classics reprinted all these in one volume, Raffles: The Amateur Cracksman, in 1994, and it was in this form that I read and was delighted by them.
These first two volumes of Raffles stories are decidedly different, because at the end of the first, Raffles disappears and Bunny is packed off to prison. Their adventures after their reunion in the second collection cannot have the same carefree tone as before, and indeed do not, a fact that some decried as a diminution of the original impulse, but which I simply read as fictional development. Things have to happen in stories, as in life, and in good fictional series, the author follows through on the consequences of them happening.
Raffles comes to a rather improbable glorious end fighting in the Boer War in the last of these 16 stories, and when Hornung decided to revive the character with 10 more stories in A Thief in the Night in 1905, and a single novel Mr. Justice Raffles in 1909, he didn't "bring him back to life" a la Conan Doyle's "The Adventure of the Empty House," but set the stories in a period before Raffles' demise a la The Hound of the Baskervilles.
Raffles has been incarnated by at least 13 actors on screen and television, including John Barrymore, Ronald Colman, and David Niven. Anyone who can play elegant-but-larcenous has been eligible. Cary Grant would have worked.
March 2, 2023
jonhlock fanfic written in the victorian era by arthur conan doyle's brother-in-law but they do crime?? hell yeah (3.8⭐️)
January 29, 2023
Raffles is the first book in a collection of four books featuring AJ Raffles, by English author E.W. Hornung. Raffles, along with companion Harry 'Bunny' Masters, is a gentleman thief. This first book is a collection of 8 short stories featuring their crime adventures. The narrator of the stories is companion Bunny Masters, who becomes involved with Raffles when he approaches him, requesting assistance from his financial difficulties. Raffles invites Bunny to assist him with a caper and it all begins there.
The books were suggested by Hornung's brother-in-law, Arthur Conan Doyle (Hornung was married to Doyle's sister) and Raffles came into being, almost an anti-Sherlock Holmes. As Raffles tells Bunny, even though Raffles appears to be a well-off gentleman, appearances can be deceiving and his abilities as an amateur cracksman are necessary to finance Raffles living style. Definition of 'cracksman' - a burglar or safe cracker. During the day, Raffles is an excellent cricketeer and at night he and Bunny commit robberies.
Each burglary is different and interesting. There is steady friction between Bunny and Raffles as Raffles likes to go off by himself to plan his robberies and Bunny feels untrusted and frustrated. It's generally diamonds that piques Raffles' interest and he uses his ability at disguise when fencing the gems. The duo face threats from other burglars and also in a few of the cases from Scotland Yard inpsector MacKenzie. The book starts off with Bunny's first involvement, desparate for financial assistance.
We also find out about Raffles' first robbery attempt. It's set in Australia where Raffles is visiting to participate in cricket matches. Needing money, he discovers a cousin who works in banking and decides to visit him to get some help. Neat twists and turns with this one as he is mistaken for his cousin and decides to rob the bank at which his cousin is employed.
There are other neat stories; Raffles trying to beat another cracksman to diamonds while visiting an estate to participate in a cricket tournament (the first time we also meet Inspector Mackenzie.) This other cracksman, Crawshay, makes an additional appearance. Having escaped from Dartmoor prison, he shows up at Raffles' digs demanding help from Raffles to escape from England.
In another caper, Raffles and Bunny are hired to steal back a Velazquez painting, with a neat twist. The final caper involves a cruise to the Mediterranean, to steal a pearl, given as a gift by the Queen to a foreign king. Will this caper be the end of the partnership? Of course there are a couple of other capers as well. All interesting and different. Raffles is an interesting character, maybe not quite in the league of Sherlock Holmes but still entertaining.
The stories were turned into plays, movies (David Niven portrayed Raffles), radio shows and were very successful during their time. Well worth trying. (3 stars)
The books were suggested by Hornung's brother-in-law, Arthur Conan Doyle (Hornung was married to Doyle's sister) and Raffles came into being, almost an anti-Sherlock Holmes. As Raffles tells Bunny, even though Raffles appears to be a well-off gentleman, appearances can be deceiving and his abilities as an amateur cracksman are necessary to finance Raffles living style. Definition of 'cracksman' - a burglar or safe cracker. During the day, Raffles is an excellent cricketeer and at night he and Bunny commit robberies.
Each burglary is different and interesting. There is steady friction between Bunny and Raffles as Raffles likes to go off by himself to plan his robberies and Bunny feels untrusted and frustrated. It's generally diamonds that piques Raffles' interest and he uses his ability at disguise when fencing the gems. The duo face threats from other burglars and also in a few of the cases from Scotland Yard inpsector MacKenzie. The book starts off with Bunny's first involvement, desparate for financial assistance.
We also find out about Raffles' first robbery attempt. It's set in Australia where Raffles is visiting to participate in cricket matches. Needing money, he discovers a cousin who works in banking and decides to visit him to get some help. Neat twists and turns with this one as he is mistaken for his cousin and decides to rob the bank at which his cousin is employed.
There are other neat stories; Raffles trying to beat another cracksman to diamonds while visiting an estate to participate in a cricket tournament (the first time we also meet Inspector Mackenzie.) This other cracksman, Crawshay, makes an additional appearance. Having escaped from Dartmoor prison, he shows up at Raffles' digs demanding help from Raffles to escape from England.
In another caper, Raffles and Bunny are hired to steal back a Velazquez painting, with a neat twist. The final caper involves a cruise to the Mediterranean, to steal a pearl, given as a gift by the Queen to a foreign king. Will this caper be the end of the partnership? Of course there are a couple of other capers as well. All interesting and different. Raffles is an interesting character, maybe not quite in the league of Sherlock Holmes but still entertaining.
The stories were turned into plays, movies (David Niven portrayed Raffles), radio shows and were very successful during their time. Well worth trying. (3 stars)
January 12, 2024
Gentleman thief A. J. Raffles and his accomplice Harry ‘Bunny’ Masters are the criminal mirror images of Holmes and Watson. The resemblance is entirely intentional: this book bears the dedication ‘To A.C.D., This Form of Flattery’ and Hornung was married to Constance Doyle, Conan Doyle’s sister. Raffles is a dandy about town, a handsome, well-heeled member of late Victorian society who is also a diamond thief and burglar. He has a bachelor pad at the Albany, belongs to the best West End clubs and dines in grand houses as a guest before breaking into them and cracking the safe.
Raffles and Bunny met at their public school and are very close friends. Their relationship carries a delicious homoerotic subtext. At first I thought this was my fevered imagination but Hornung knew Oscar Wilde and it seems that echoes of the Wilde/Bosie dalliance were also entirely intentional. Raffles and Bunny inhabit a Wildean world of paradox, moral relativism and aestheticism. Raffles is criminal as artist relishing the conception, plotting and realisation of his crimes. He steals partly to maintain his lifestyle but also for the sheer creative fun of it. And there’s a whiff of socialism in the privileged air: challenged by Bunny about his depredations Raffles avers that crime is wrong but the distribution of wealth is wrong as well.
He has a talent for cricket and plays for England - ‘a dangerous bat, a brilliant field, and perhaps the very finest slow bowler of his decade’. His fame on the field provides cover for his secret life of larceny as well as allowing Hornung to spin parallels between the game of cricket and the game of crime. George Orwell had a talent for writing perceptive essays and he wrote one about Raffles. Orwell points out that cricket is the perfect sport for Raffles as it is bound up, in England at least, with notions of style and fair play; the phrase ‘it’s not cricket’ to express ethical disapproval is not entirely obsolete even in the 21st century. By making his burglar a cricketer, observes Orwell, Hornung was ‘drawing the sharpest moral contrast that he was able to imagine’.
Raffles is an amateur cricketer, just as he is an amateur cracksman, and he regards with condescension the professionals in both occupations. Raffles, you understand, is a Gentleman and most emphatically not a Player. Which brings us to the essence of these delightfully absurd adventures: snobbery. By making his hero a toff Hornung catered to his readers fantasies about upper crust society but making the toff a criminal also enabled him to playfully subvert Victorian values. Raffles has it both ways with great panache and so does Hornung. These interrelated stories are awash with period charm, cleverly plotted and a rattling good read.
Raffles and Bunny met at their public school and are very close friends. Their relationship carries a delicious homoerotic subtext. At first I thought this was my fevered imagination but Hornung knew Oscar Wilde and it seems that echoes of the Wilde/Bosie dalliance were also entirely intentional. Raffles and Bunny inhabit a Wildean world of paradox, moral relativism and aestheticism. Raffles is criminal as artist relishing the conception, plotting and realisation of his crimes. He steals partly to maintain his lifestyle but also for the sheer creative fun of it. And there’s a whiff of socialism in the privileged air: challenged by Bunny about his depredations Raffles avers that crime is wrong but the distribution of wealth is wrong as well.
He has a talent for cricket and plays for England - ‘a dangerous bat, a brilliant field, and perhaps the very finest slow bowler of his decade’. His fame on the field provides cover for his secret life of larceny as well as allowing Hornung to spin parallels between the game of cricket and the game of crime. George Orwell had a talent for writing perceptive essays and he wrote one about Raffles. Orwell points out that cricket is the perfect sport for Raffles as it is bound up, in England at least, with notions of style and fair play; the phrase ‘it’s not cricket’ to express ethical disapproval is not entirely obsolete even in the 21st century. By making his burglar a cricketer, observes Orwell, Hornung was ‘drawing the sharpest moral contrast that he was able to imagine’.
Raffles is an amateur cricketer, just as he is an amateur cracksman, and he regards with condescension the professionals in both occupations. Raffles, you understand, is a Gentleman and most emphatically not a Player. Which brings us to the essence of these delightfully absurd adventures: snobbery. By making his hero a toff Hornung catered to his readers fantasies about upper crust society but making the toff a criminal also enabled him to playfully subvert Victorian values. Raffles has it both ways with great panache and so does Hornung. These interrelated stories are awash with period charm, cleverly plotted and a rattling good read.
November 19, 2008
It would be impossible to read "The Amateur Cracksman" -- the first of E.W. Hornung's books featuring gentleman thief A.J. Raffles and his sidekick and chronicler Bunny -- without comparing it to the Sherlock Holmes books. Hornung, after all, was Arthur Conan Doyle's brother-in-law, and he created Raffles as something of a reversal of Holmes -- a character as cunning as the famous detective, and as much a master of disguise, but prone to using his ingenuity to commit crimes rather than solve them. Bunny, for his part, is about as clueless as Dr. Watson, and as in awe of Raffles as Watson was of Holmes.
Fortunately, "Amateur Cracksman" compares favorably to the Holmes stories. The individual criminal adventures Raffles and Bunny embark upon are not as clever as even the least of the Holmes mysteries, but they're still good fun. The reader shouldn't try to solve the mysteries, as he or she would with a Holmes story (there's typically little to solve in the Raffles adventures, and the twists are usually easy to predict), but instead just go along for the ride.
It's surprising that the Raffles stories are not better known and more widely read today, particularly given the enduring popularity of the Sherlock Holmes stories. They certainly deserve more attention. It's a shame, though, that Hornung and his brother-in-law never collaborated to have Holmes solve a Raffles crime. Perhaps it's for the best: Raffles surely would have ended up in jail for good.
Fortunately, "Amateur Cracksman" compares favorably to the Holmes stories. The individual criminal adventures Raffles and Bunny embark upon are not as clever as even the least of the Holmes mysteries, but they're still good fun. The reader shouldn't try to solve the mysteries, as he or she would with a Holmes story (there's typically little to solve in the Raffles adventures, and the twists are usually easy to predict), but instead just go along for the ride.
It's surprising that the Raffles stories are not better known and more widely read today, particularly given the enduring popularity of the Sherlock Holmes stories. They certainly deserve more attention. It's a shame, though, that Hornung and his brother-in-law never collaborated to have Holmes solve a Raffles crime. Perhaps it's for the best: Raffles surely would have ended up in jail for good.
December 25, 2018
Free download available at Project Gutenberg.
From BBC Radio 4Extra:
Bunny is surprised and pleased to be invited by Raffles to share the latter's self-imposed 'rest cure' in a large house in Kensington.
But Raffles, needless to say, has his own somewhat nefarious reasons for wanting to take a holiday...
Starring Jeremy Clyde as AJ Raffles, Michael Cochrane as Bunny Manders, Christopher Benjamin as Colonel Crutchley, Laurence Payne as the Porter and Norman Bird as the Cabby.
EW Hornung's Raffles stories about the 'gentleman thief' dramatised by David Buck.
Signature tune composed by Jim Parker.
Director: Gordon House
A BBC Radio 4/ BBC World Service production first broadcast in 1988.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007...
From BBC Radio 4Extra:
Bunny is surprised and pleased to be invited by Raffles to share the latter's self-imposed 'rest cure' in a large house in Kensington.
But Raffles, needless to say, has his own somewhat nefarious reasons for wanting to take a holiday...
Starring Jeremy Clyde as AJ Raffles, Michael Cochrane as Bunny Manders, Christopher Benjamin as Colonel Crutchley, Laurence Payne as the Porter and Norman Bird as the Cabby.
EW Hornung's Raffles stories about the 'gentleman thief' dramatised by David Buck.
Signature tune composed by Jim Parker.
Director: Gordon House
A BBC Radio 4/ BBC World Service production first broadcast in 1988.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007...
February 2, 2018
Sherlock Holmes was written by Conan Doyle but his brother in law got sick of him & his ego going and on about Holmes so he decided to put pen to paper but instead of dective he created a Robin Hood style anti hero Raffles
July 10, 2025
far less smut and far more racism than i expected of the worlds first johnlock fanfiction
Read
October 23, 2017Did not finish.
A. J. Raffles must be just about THE most annoying character ever created. Narcisistic, and borderline psychopathic. And Bunny is a snivelling little wimp.
Managed two and a half stories before throwing in the towel.
A. J. Raffles must be just about THE most annoying character ever created. Narcisistic, and borderline psychopathic. And Bunny is a snivelling little wimp.
Managed two and a half stories before throwing in the towel.
March 11, 2021
Okay, das war eine Qual ... gegen Ende habe ich nur noch geskippt. Wie ein Buch über zwei Kriminelle derart langweilig sein kann, ist mir unbegreiflich.
August 23, 2022
It’s several individual stories, so don’t expect an overarching plot. The heists and adventures didn’t always work for me, but I really liked the main characters and I would read more.
July 26, 2020
This one was interesting. Raffles struck me as a weird love child of Moriarty and Robin Hood, and his friend Bunny, who narrates, is wildly head over heels for him. Wildly. Passionately. His description of Raffles barely a few pages in is practically swooning over him, and he gets hilariously jealous when Raffles spends more time with a girl than he does with Bunny. I'm still not really on board with the thievery (honestly, their spending and/or gambling habits must be completely absurd to get through the amount of money they get from their very first heist together so quickly), but I am completely there for Bunny being ludicrously in love with Raffles.
June 20, 2010
Raffles is such an appealing character that it is a wonder that no other writer has quite captured his spirit. He is one of a class of well-educated young nineteenth-century swells, fit for earning no living, having apparently inherited no fortune, yet expected to live like gentlemen of means.
In an earlier age, younger sons or the sons of impecunious gentlemen would have ridden off to the Crusades, or crept into poor livings as clergymen. By the Victorian age, growing numbers of such boys had to choose between the colonies and trade. Compared to these options, Raffles’ choice of burglary makes a certain sense. He is Robin Hood, Hawkins and Drake, a gentleman cricketer with exquisite public school manners, the prefect all the younger boys looked up to.
In an earlier age, younger sons or the sons of impecunious gentlemen would have ridden off to the Crusades, or crept into poor livings as clergymen. By the Victorian age, growing numbers of such boys had to choose between the colonies and trade. Compared to these options, Raffles’ choice of burglary makes a certain sense. He is Robin Hood, Hawkins and Drake, a gentleman cricketer with exquisite public school manners, the prefect all the younger boys looked up to.
Raffles had the subtle power of making himself irresistible at will. He was beyond comparison the most masterful man whom I have ever known.I remember reading the Raffles books when I was a child and finding them tremendously good fun. The stories are simple adventures, rather innocent beyond Raffles’ occupation, their improbable plots pure escapism.
Half his power lay in a conciliating trick of sinking the commander in the leader. And it was impossible not to follow one who led with such a zest. You might question but you followed first. –Raffles: The Amateur Crackman, E W Hornung (1899)
March 5, 2013
Where to start? These stores are a sort of reverse Sherlock Holmes. The protagonist, a thief, takes the man who chronicles his adventures with him on his capers, and these stories are set in roughly the same time period and in mostly similar places. Whereas, however, Doyle wrote with wonderful flare and style, E. W. Hornung does not. The lines are flat and unengaging. Raffles is no Holmes. Though both share a penchant for keeping their friend in the dark in order to surprise the reader, his intelligence fails to impress. This is because of the next failing, the plot contrivances. There would be little conflict if Raffles and Bunny (Yes, those are their names) simply walked in, took what they wanted, and left, so Hornung creates unlikely obstacles for them to overcome. These inevitably end in them nearly being caught, which they usually manage to avoid through a second unlikely plot contrivance.
This is one of those emperor has no clothes collections, a book so bad that one wonders how some poor fools are taken in by it, yet, as you can see by the other reviews here, many are. Readers who like this sort of thing, but lack discrimination, may well enjoy this book as much as so many others do. Those who understand how effective stories are put together will see these stories for the messes that they are.
This is one of those emperor has no clothes collections, a book so bad that one wonders how some poor fools are taken in by it, yet, as you can see by the other reviews here, many are. Readers who like this sort of thing, but lack discrimination, may well enjoy this book as much as so many others do. Those who understand how effective stories are put together will see these stories for the messes that they are.
July 28, 2019
A gentleman thief who is no gentleman!
I'd read a couple of other classic gentleman-thief books (Lupin, Phantomas), so I was expecting something similar. Nope. These are the stories of how two men-about-town slide down the slippery slope of crime, with no pretense of solving crimes or stealing from the rich to give to the poor. There's acid to the stories--as if we were reading the modern stories of how a famous sports figure and a famous journalist, presumed to be wealthy on the basis of their work, were ripping off CEOs because they were really only making peanuts.
Recommend if you like classic crime books. The character, written by Arthur Conan Doyle's brother in law, is the reverse of Sherlock Holmes--except in intellect and daring. So consider a read if you like Holmes as well.
I'd read a couple of other classic gentleman-thief books (Lupin, Phantomas), so I was expecting something similar. Nope. These are the stories of how two men-about-town slide down the slippery slope of crime, with no pretense of solving crimes or stealing from the rich to give to the poor. There's acid to the stories--as if we were reading the modern stories of how a famous sports figure and a famous journalist, presumed to be wealthy on the basis of their work, were ripping off CEOs because they were really only making peanuts.
Recommend if you like classic crime books. The character, written by Arthur Conan Doyle's brother in law, is the reverse of Sherlock Holmes--except in intellect and daring. So consider a read if you like Holmes as well.
August 22, 2023
Had distinct preconceptions of what this was going to be like and they were not good. I just could not see how the concept of the gentleman thief could offer many surprises or excitement but i was totally wrong.
The amount of variety throughout this book is really good and it never feels dull or repetitive and Raffles doesn't come across as too clever or as flawless as one might expect. Ending comes along rather suddenly and doesn't seem to well conceived but apart from that highly recommended.
The amount of variety throughout this book is really good and it never feels dull or repetitive and Raffles doesn't come across as too clever or as flawless as one might expect. Ending comes along rather suddenly and doesn't seem to well conceived but apart from that highly recommended.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 353 reviews