Laurie R. King Virtual Book Club discussion

Greetings, everyone, and welcome to our discussion book for July: Castle Shade, the 17th Mary Russell novel!

Castle Shade follows directly the events chronicled in Riviera Gold and begins with Russell awakening from a feverish nightmare, a dream of a dark night riding in a carriage, howling wolves, and most disturbingly, bloody hands. She discovers she is actually in a railway car, stopped at an indecipherable station, with hands blood-free and her wits slowly gathering. She remembers that they were on their way to Roumania...

And so another adventure for Russell and Holmes takes shape. This should be a fun one to discuss! Keep in mind, as always please, no spoiler comments for the first ten days of the month, in fairness to our readers. After that, however, everything is fair game. I hope you enjoy (or have already enjoyed) another wonderful Russell memoir, and let's hear your thoughts!

Dayna, it is certainly a book worth savoring (imho)😉. I was fortunate enough to read it in ARC form earlier so my re-read over the last few days in preparation for the month’s discussion was unhurried and enjoyable.
I have also been reading Dracula (Les Klinger’s annotated) at a considerably slower pace since I am meticulously reading all the wonderful notes that Les has so assiduously provided. A knowledge of Dracula may not be a requirement for enjoying Castle Shade but it does provide a nice bit of atmosphere.

John wrote: "I have also been reading Dracula (Les Klinger’s annotated) at a considerably slower pace since I am meticulously reading all the wonderful notes that Les has so assiduously provided.."

I've read Castle Shade twice, and I'm finally getting around to listening to the Dracula audiobook read by Alan Cumming and Tim Curry. I love all the parallels between the books. I'm thinking they were intended... but who knows, maybe I'm just seeing things.

Did anyone else get that same feeling?

Sabrina, I like how the fact that Dracula (the novel) was popular fiction at the time of Castle Shade and references to it, obvious and more subtle, provided some more depth to the story.

In case anyone in this discussion missed my post in the Dracula thread:

YouTube has several video tours of Bran Castle which, although it has as much to do with Dracula as does the White House -- the castle described in Stoker's book is VERY different from Bran -- is being advertised by the Rumanian tourist authorities as "Dracula's Castle." Taking a tour will surely help you to visualize what Holmes and Russell are doing.

How is the reading coming, everyone?

John wrote: "How is the reading coming, everyone?"

I listened to the audiobook and ripped right through it.

At the beginning, did it seem you others that Russell was a little impatient with Holmes? Was this irritation caused by her cold, or by Holmes reluctance to keep her fully informed or by something else?

Lenore wrote:
...At the beginning, did it seem you others that Russell was a little impatient with Holme..."

Well, Holmes was being Holmes, and it speaks to Mary's love for him that she understands him better than most and is typically accommodating of his idiosyncrasies. HOWEVER, she is feeling unwell, is physically exhausted and emotionally spent, and she is only human (granted, a bit of a superwoman), so in this case 'Holmes being Holmes' is a bit much, even for her.

I read and reviewed an ARC, and LOVED it.
I think it wouldn't break the spoiler rule to say that I admire Mary's handling of travel problems and don't blame her a bit for being a bit fed up with Holmes' inaction on the matter. Brava, strong, forceful woman!

Lenore wrote: "John wrote: "How is the reading coming, everyone?"

I listened to the audiobook and ripped right through it.

At the beginning, did it seem you others that Russell was a little impatient with Holme..."

She is at odds with him over their ongoing disagreement about doing work for Mycroft Holmes, I believe. I am still trying to figure out what book in which this rift started, but she grows increasingly angry about Mycroft's power.

Cynthia wrote: "...I am still trying to figure out what book in which this rift started..."

I think it started with GOTH, when Russell discovered that Mycroft had sidelined funds for one purpose to fund his secret agency (thus eluding any Parliamentary or other oversight), and then, instead of holding onto Peter James West when Goodman pulled him over the bridge railing, she allowed them both, at Goodman's request, to fall into the Thames. This made it hard for Mycroft to figure out what West had done to screw things up during his imprisonment of Mycroft. But I think it really intensified in GARM when she learned that Mycroft had ordered the assassination of Abd el-Krim. Except, as I wrote when we discussed the latter book, it is more likely that Peter West ordered the assassination in Mycroft's name.

LRK, if you're reading this, I'd love a book that clears Mycroft of this ridiculous slander.

Oooh, Lenore, that’s an intriguing theory, that Peter West ordered the assassination in GARM. If so, yes, let’s clear Mycroft’s name!

Russell’s dual desires to avoid political intrigue and see Mycroft’s outsized influence reined in (a la GOTH), at least over their lives, certainly seems to be coming to a head, and at odds with both Holmes’ professional occupation post Baker St. (when he’s taken on more intelligence than criminal work), and the geo-political tectonic shifts starting to shake the world again.

It’s a dilemma reflective of the Jazz Age, and their ages, too, I think… that tug of war between wanting to lose oneself in youthful play, especially after the horrors of WWI (water skiing, anyone?) versus rolling up sleeves, taking on responsibilities and doing unpleasant and dangerous work, in this case, preparing for, and defending against, malignant forces seeding influence across the world (and, yes, it feels unsettling to write that today).

Of course, we know what’s coming (assuming no alt-reality ;) but even in 1925, as ISLA and RIVA elude, the signs are there that things are heading in an unfortunate direction. Can Holmes, so attuned to justice and knowing what his brother is seeing with the geo-political landscape — and knowing what conflict could mean for England after the experience of WWI — can he shut politics out and keep to the sidelines, or at least to only criminal cases, even given his age?

Lack of utility during WWI led to Holmes’ 1915 low point until being saved by his meeting Russell, but since then, he’s been actively contributing to and influencing world affairs with Russell at his side. To now have these two fundamental elements of his life become either/or? That sounds tough… and possibly why when reading RIVA, it did seem to me Russell and Holmes were on different pages at various times, even to the point of physically not hearing each other. At one point, I began thinking Holmes was perhaps keeping Russell at a distance intentionally, due to politics, or more precisely his seeing a deepening divergence between them over politics, and that becoming a reason for his ‘setting her free’ in a way (potentially set up in ISLA when he reflects that she has a choice and could do anything she wants, not necessarily what he’s about.)

Without spoilers, then, I’ll just say for now CAST cleared up some of this thought process for me while raising a few other Qs — in the best way!

I'd add to all of the above, that Russell is probably feeling a little bit of guilt about lying to Holmes. She may not either recognize it or acknowledge it, but to have a lie between two people in a deeply trusting relationship is corrosive.

Lenore wrote: "Cynthia wrote: "...I am still trying to figure out what book in which this rift started..."

I think it started with GOTH, when Russell discovered that Mycroft had sidelined funds for one purpose t..."

Thank you very much. I guess I need to go read God of the Hive

reread

KarenB wrote: "I'd add to all of the above, that Russell is probably feeling a little bit of guilt about lying to Holmes. She may not either recognize it or acknowledge it, but to have a lie between two people in..."

Excellent point!

Russell's issues with Mycroft started when she discovered he had begun his career basically by misappropriating funds in GOTH & LANG - those two run together in my head so I'm not sure exactly where it happened. There were good reasons for it, but as Russell had seen Mycroft not only as immensely powerful, but also an implacable force for good, it was fairly devastating to her.

I think she's going to need to find a way to forgive him, to realize that people aren't perfect, that he's basically a good man with very hard choices sometimes. And she needs to realize that for him, the ultimate good is what is good for the British Empire and that is not always the same thing as "good." That realization may have started in GAME but it sure got jump-started in GARM.

But now there's all these lingering tensions to be sorted out - Holmes and Russell not being totally honest with each other, Holmes and Mycroft not entirely on the same page, Russell mistrusting Mycroft and his motivations. It'll be fun to see how Laurie sorts all of that out over time.

I agree! I found those moments to be anguishing, and I am interested to see how it plays out.

Lenore wrote: "Cynthia wrote: "...I am still trying to figure out what book in which this rift started..."

LRK, if you're reading this, I'd love a book that clears Mycroft of this ridiculous slander..."

I hope to get there eventually…

KarenB wrote: "Russell's issues with Mycroft started when she discovered he had begun his career basically by misappropriating funds in GOTH & LANG - those two run together in my head so I'm not sure exactly wher..."

I agree. I think a big part of Russell feeling so hurt/betrayed by Mycroft is the fact she met him so young and had him on something of an impossible pedestal in her mind. While he's all but human in many regards, he is still fallible. Apart from being faced with that very real disappointment, I think she still has deep trust in him because she knows she can always go to him if she/they are in crisis, need shelter, or even need information to help with an investigation.

It sounds like the next book or two should bring the issue to a head, which I hope will end well. I like Mycroft and his presence in their lives.

Haven’t got the new book from library yet, but am really enjoying the discussion! It’s the 10th but I’m not minding spoilers as I do a lot of reading aloud…

Deeply repelled by the idea of reading Dracula and so glad to hear about the audiobook with Alan Cummings. Will try to find it.

We have passed the no-spoiler zone so feel free to fire away. If you are feeling kind towards the group you can always preface your post with *spoiler alert!*😉

I am curious what other people think about Holmes's musings during his solo train journey. His thinking about their marriage confused me. He sees a connection between the tension created by their continued work for Mycroft and whatever Russell got up to with Mrs Hudson in the last book. I'm not sure what that overriding connection is. Also, I'm surprised he thinks Russell nearly lied to him when readers of the last book know she did lie to him, and I'm surprised that he doesn't perceive what Russell was doing to help Mrs. Hudson. Also, his perception of what happened during the carriage ride on December 26, 1921 and Russell's intentions that night seemed highly inaccurate then and even more misguided now (in book time) several years later.

Cathy wrote: "I am curious what other people think about Holmes's musings during his solo train journey. His thinking about their marriage confused me. He sees a connection between the tension created by their c..."

Furthermore, these are Russell's memoirs. How does she know what he was thinking?

In chapter 10 Russell says: "Bears, again? Oh, lovely." I don't remember bears before, in this book or any of the others?

In chapter 10 Russell says: "Bears, again? Oh, lovely." I don't remember bears before, in this book or any of the others?

There was an off-stage encounter with a bear in Dreaming Spies. I can't remember the details and am on vacation so I can't look it up.

Karen is absolutely correct about the encounter with bears occurring in Dreaming Spies. Chapter 16, Russell and Holmes are on their last day of cross-country travel on the way to Mojiro-joku, they have stopped by a creek to clean themselves up somewhat, and Russell turns to find herself face to face with a bear. Good memory, Karen!

Thanks!

Another question: Looks pro's Most Dramatic Final Line? Any one read The Vampyre?

MaryL wrote: "Another question: Looks pro's Most Dramatic Final Line? Any one read The Vampyre?"
I did find the quoted Vampyre story, well worth reading. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/6087/...

MaryL wrote: "In chapter 10 Russell says: "Bears, again? Oh, lovely." I don't remember bears before, in this book or any of the others?"

What a calm, droll response, so different from the screaming I'd be doing. ;-)

Lenore wrote: these are Russell's memoirs. How does she know what he was thinking?"
Could this be a "whoops" on the part of Ms. Russell's editor, Ms. King? 😁

This is not the first time we've been told about Holmes's thoughts or actions when Russell isn't present. I think they've been explained before as accounts she was given (by him) and then inserted in her memoirs to round out the story. Locked Rooms and Garment of Shadows come to mind: plenty of Holmes's solo activities.

A general question: In the Russell & Holmes books how important is the mystery and its resolution to your enjoyment of the story? (This is assuming that the characters in the story are the most important aspect; maybe that isn’t true for all readers!)

I forgot that Castle Shade was being discussed this month here. I loved it and my review is posted on my The Reading Room blog. And, I'm also thrilled that next month's book is The Historian, one of my favorite books of all my reading. I do enjoy the Dracula connection and unique takes on it. Laurie's book and Kostova's book certainly are unique.

John, you asked how important the mystery and its resolution is to our enjoyment of the story. To me, it's of major importance, as I always look forward to the different mysteries in which Russell and Holmes get involved and their clever sleuthing to arrive at the solution.

I loved Castle Shade because it combined many of my favorite things. Mainly my two favorite storylines, Dracula and Sherlock Holmes. The Historian is another favorite of mine because it has such a rich historical background woven throughout the novel.

In my opinion, the answer to a mystery SHOULD bring about enjoyment to a reader because it covers all the bases. If there's a loose end, then I feel that leaves the author with artistic license to write another book. Ultimately though, there should be a logical and satisfying conclusion to the who-dunnit trope.

Laurie wrote: "Lenore wrote: "Cynthia wrote: "...I am still trying to figure out what book in which this rift started..."

LRK, if you're reading this, I'd love a book that clears Mycroft of this ridiculous sland..."

Laurie wrote: "Lenore wrote: "Cynthia wrote: "...I am still trying to figure out what book in which this rift started..."

LRK, if you're reading this, I'd love a book that clears Mycroft of this ridiculous sland..."

That's good to know! Looking forward to it.

Caitlin wrote: "I loved Castle Shade because it combined many of my favorite things. Mainly my two favorite storylines, Dracula and Sherlock Holmes. The Historian is another favorite of mine because it has such a ..."

I agree. I love the solution of a good mystery, ideally one I've almost figured out by the time it's revealed, so there's satisfaction and a bit of a surprise. CASTLE SHADE did it wonderfully.
Thanks for the heads-up on the next book.

This is my first comment here, and I'm so glad to be here!
CAST was marvelous! The oh-so-slight humor from Russell through-out drew me in. When she scares Holmes into almost dropping his match, I was a goner. Also enjoyed 'listening' to Holmes as he dissects his feelings on how marriage has changed him, even though the changes have been like pulling teeth, for Russell. Am looking forward to the next phase of "Us vs. Mycroft" in the Russell/Holmes partnership, since Russell actually complained to The Queen that she isn't hitting her books at all these days.

Fun bits:
#1: The butler has fangs!
#2: Russell drunk, talking about crawling down the castle walls...hehehe!
#3: "Godammit! Who is playing silly buggers here?"
#4" Oh, if I survived this, Holmes was going to kill me."

Now, a few down sides:
#1: okay, a smooch on the side of her head was nice, and we can infer all kinds of things from the out-of-the-bath full body scan, but I always want more! It doesn't have to be on the MREG scale, but how about MOOR or GAME or GARM? Or course, Holmes was shaking with rage...and there was "I'm glad to see you" in the doctor's house, and this adventure only took five days!
#2: I figured out the villain too early, and tried like heck to ignore that when I reread it.

Favorite Laurie R. King showing her stuff line: "The floorboards talked to each other."

I felt kind of conflicted about the doctor. Yes, what he was doing to try to drive the queen away from the castle was wrong, wrong, wrong. And as I understood the description of the geneological tree showing his ancestry, it seems at best to show that he was in a different line than a direct heir. And the way land was handed down was unfair. But . . .

He seemed to really care about the people in the village, and he seemed genuinely -- and by some lights, realistically -- to feel that the royal presence wasn't really moving the village into its best version of the 20th century. So while Holmes and Russell did the right thing, as best they could, I didn't feel the outcome was quite the fairytale ending that Russell had in mind.

Lenore wrote: "I felt kind of conflicted about the doctor. Yes, what he was doing to try to drive the queen away from the castle was wrong, wrong, wrong. And as I understood the description of the geneological tr..."
I agree, his mania seemed sort of unreal; he was so unemotional, but he was sneaking around at night...he's an interesting bad guy, however.

Many readers have complained that the books have come to lack any hint that the couple are lovers. But the author doesn’t seem to want to oblige the readers in this way. Funny that Holmes thinks a marriage of convenience was impossible for them when, assuming that means sexless, it seems that’s what they’ve got

In the '70s I lived in the Loring Park neighborhood of Minneapolis, an eclectic, somewhat marginal area at the time. I decided that my neighbors' and friends' personal business was not my affair.
That is my prelude to saying, I don't feel left out if Mary Russell does not choose to share the romantic aspects of her life with her biographer and thereby her readers. I assume my happily married friends have their own reasons for being happy, but I wouldn't presume to ask for details.
Another bit of relationship insight: My high school students were discussing whether it was even worth getting married since they knew so few who stayed together. I told them of several long-lasting marriages of storytelling friends and promised to ask their secrets. Their advice was have some shared interests and some non-shared, and respect each other's non-shared interests. It seems to me that Russell and Holmes have that going for them also.

As Vicky observed, several earlier books did include “romantic” details. Their absence from more recent books raises questions and frustrates readers who think the nature of the relationship is their business because it’s what drew them into the series.

Cathy wrote: "Many readers have complained that the books have come to lack any hint that the couple are lovers. But the author doesn’t seem to want to oblige the readers in this way. Funny that Holmes thinks a ..."

It's not sexless, just not any of our business. The affection Russell and Holmes have for each other shines through. We don't need details of a lascivious nature. The stories are set in in an era that did not endlessly discuss sex.
Besides, these are mysteries, and to answer John, that's what first attracted me, and keeps me coming back. The excellent character development is a close second in my enjoyment.

Obviously this issue (whether the books should include hints that Russell and Holmes are lovers) has strong adherents on both sides. But nobody is looking for "details of a lascivious nature," although some such do appear in fanfiction. For example, the bits in the Moor and Letters of Mary are fairly demure. And surely "a physical reminder of my emotional center" (in Garment of Shadows) is pretty subtle. The point is that all the books are set in one era but some, mainly earlier ones, include such little references. Castle has a peck on the cheek and an intimate, but rather clinical, examination of Russell's body after she's kidnapped.
To answer John's question I am more interested in character development than mystery. But almost all the fiction I read is mysteries. I don't try to guess whodunit. I like the reveal to be a surprise but one that on examination makes good sense. I don't like it when the villain turns out to be a minor character who we suddenly learn is a third cousin once removed of a major character and that somehow explains the motive for the crime. I thought the doctor here was among several plausible culprits. I liked the chase sequence on the motorcycle. Did we ever learn before that Holmes was an expert motorcyclist? I think we knew Russell rode a motorcycle.

Cathy wrote: "Did we ever learn before that Holmes was an expert motorcyclist? I think we knew Russell rode a motorcycle...."

Wasn’t there a reference somewhere to a crate of motorcycles that followed Russell and Holmes back from their honeymoon, and that they were a bit bashed up (or only 2/3rds were left or something like that)? I don’t think it was MOOR but dropped in as a reflection in a later book or short story?

In Justice Hall she recalls returning home from three months in Europe and included in their “equipage” was “two-thirds of a motorcycle.” No explanation provided!

Has there ever been a worth-while skill at which Holmes was not adept?

Research reveals that I was thinking about Russell’s statement in God of the Hive that she had recently learned to motorcycle in Los Angeles. I don’t think we have heard the LA story but it may be why Holmes had a solo San Francisco adventure in the Art of Detection.