L'affaire du chien des Baskerville MOBI ó chien des

L'affaire du chien des Baskerville MOBI ó chien des

L'affaire du chien des Baskerville ❮PDF❯ ❤ L'affaire du chien des Baskerville Author Pierre Bayard – Larringtonlifecoaching.co.uk Les personnages litt raires ne sont pas, comme on le croit trop souvent, des tres de papier, mais des cr atures vivantes, qui m nent une existence autonome l int rieur des textes et vont jusqu commett Les personnages litt raires ne sont pas, chien des MOBI î comme on le croit trop souvent, des tres de L'affaire du MOBI :å papier, mais des cr atures vivantes, qui m nent une existence autonome l int rieur des textes du chien des Epub â et vont jusqu commettre des meurtres l insu de l auteur Faute de l avoir compris, Conan Doyle a laiss Sherlock Holmes se tromper dans sa plus c l bre enqu te, Le Chien des Baskerville, et accuser tort un malheureux animal, permettant au v ritable assassin d chapper la justice Ce livre r tablit la v rit.


10 thoughts on “L'affaire du chien des Baskerville

  1. Jonathan Terrington Jonathan Terrington says:

    With such an ambitious, and in some aspects arrogant, title Pierre Bayard was always going to have to write a very convincing analysis Which in my opinion he managed to do while also throwing in a hint of literary criticism of a type I had not paid attention to as of yet And while such things appeared at first disconnected from his analysis he managed to pull everything back together by the end to throw the entire case on its head Bayard for the first half of the book begins with a recap of p With such an ambitious, and in some aspects arrogant, title Pierre Bayard was always going to have to write a very convincing analysis Which in my opinion he managed to do while also throwing in a hint of literary criticism of a type I had not paid attention to as of yet And while such things appeared at first disconnected from his analysis he managed to pull everything back together by the end to throw the entire case on its head Bayard for the first half of the book begins with a recap of past events This is thetaxing and uninteresting aspect of his work And when he leaves The Hounds of the Baskervilles to talk about how he developed a mode of detective criticism for use on Hamlet and The Murder of Roger Ackroyd serves to do little but tell how good Bayard is at solving mysteries the writers cannot However once you pass through this unnecessary hurdle the true magic of Bayard s analysis appears.He begins by breaking down Holmes method through drawing attention to passages from both The Hound of the Baskervilles and other notable stories in the canon Through quotes and references he quickly reveals the subtle flaws behind Holmes technique.Bayard also indicates that since the crime is observed from Watson s point of view all observation of clues and suspects is tainted by his opinion This of course influences the way the reader observes the case in the end.The next part in the investigation involves a look at the accused parties and creating proper alibis from the text view spoiler Firstly the hound is examined so that Bayard can indicate why he doesn t believe the creature guilty Secondly a look is offered at the hound s master to find out why he is likely not guilty hide spoiler A proper examination of the crime out of place Bayard proceeds on a slight tangent It is this aspect of his work which lowers its overall standard His observations are quality and his final judgements profound but his method of informing the reader lets him down Perhaps that is in part resultant from translation but nonetheless it is an obvious flaw The tangent involves a look at how the literary and real worlds collide The author of course uses this to point out how Sherlock Holmes took on a life beyond that which Sir Arthur Conan Doyle intended After all Hound of the Baskervilles was written after he had killed the great detective This look at how Holmes became an almost real character provides some intriguing discussion apart from the case but is also used to provide reasoning to the structure of Doyle s bizarre tale.The penultimate procedure is an explanation of how Holmes falls into being manipulated and used In this section a brief examination is made of how Holmes comes to ignore his own rules about theorising and gathering dataIt is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence It biases the judgement And againIt is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts For it becomes clear that in The Hound of the Baskervilles Holmes does theorise before gathering all data As such his final judgement appears on the whole flawed despite his surety that he is correct.Sherlock Holmes is renowned for one of my personal favourite quotesWhen you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truthHowever, as Bayard shows in his conclusion, the impossible has not in this case been completely eliminated There remains one highly possible andprobable solution passed over by the detective And it is this revelation of the true andlikely suspect which makes reading Bayard s work worth all the flaws and disjointed sentences.In summary I would state that this is a work with on the whole excellent depth A book that reveals how superficial the seemingly conclusive solution is in The Hound of the Baskervilles And it is worth all the painstaking disassembly by Bayard to see the end conclusion A conclusion which will flip your idea of The Hound of the Baskervilles on its head So I suggest that if you haven t read The Hound of the Baskervilles that you do so and then right afterwards delve into this You ll go from being impressed with the depth of the book to being impressed with the crime behind the crime And I still cannot figure out if the brilliant Sir Arthur Conan Doyle intended his work to end that way or not Although it seems he did with all the obvious threads


  2. Sarah W Sarah W says:

    I can t quite decide if this is a perfect example of tongue in cheek meta criticism, or a nutty rereading padded with chapters of justification that essentially sum up to It s my opinion, so it can t be wrong I suggest skipping to the last chapter and just enjoying Bayard s reworking of the plot, which isn t without its own gaping holes but is somewhatsatisfying than the solution in the original.


  3. Michael Michael says:

    I m going to chalk much of my distaste for this book due to bad translation The flow of language is terrible, making this a difficult read for me from the start.Another large part of my distaste is the sheer arrogance of the author that drips from every page Holmes was arrogant, too, but his was derived from his success in solving problems where others where having trouble discerning the mere existence of an issue Holmes also showed ahumble side numerous times Pierre Bayard exemplifies I m going to chalk much of my distaste for this book due to bad translation The flow of language is terrible, making this a difficult read for me from the start.Another large part of my distaste is the sheer arrogance of the author that drips from every page Holmes was arrogant, too, but his was derived from his success in solving problems where others where having trouble discerning the mere existence of an issue Holmes also showed ahumble side numerous times Pierre Bayard exemplifies the stereotype the Anglophone world has of the French snide, arrogant and dismissive.He spends too much of the book retelling the story in a most pedestrian and boring manner, boldly poking the reader with quick jabs about the original conclusion while telling us that all will be revealed later I don t know if this was a nod to the way Holmes worked in the original stories, but Bayard lacks the charm of the former Bayard does pick up on one thing that s quite apparent Holmes was fixated on Stapleton from the very beginning Bayard s problem is that he keeps harping on it rather than allowing the Great Detective this one idiosyncrasy His conclusion is just as forced as he claims the original one is, reading into Doyle s writing in a way only a psychologist can At the end, I m left with wondering why I plodded through this and why it took me so long to read less than 200 pages I give this book two stars simply because it wasn t boring in the sense that I wanted to finish it so I could yell at the book like one does at a referee on a televised sports game


  4. Sandy Sandy says:

    This slim volume takes a clever idea re solving the mystery of the House of the Baskervilles and pads it out in an attempt to be able to justify the idea being presented as a full book instead of a single essay Bayard expounds on literary theories of whether or not fictional characters can do things without the author knowing handled pretentiously here muchcleverly done in the fictional universes of Jasper Fforde , he has a tediously long chapter on whether or not Sherlock Holmes make This slim volume takes a clever idea re solving the mystery of the House of the Baskervilles and pads it out in an attempt to be able to justify the idea being presented as a full book instead of a single essay Bayard expounds on literary theories of whether or not fictional characters can do things without the author knowing handled pretentiously here muchcleverly done in the fictional universes of Jasper Fforde , he has a tediously long chapter on whether or not Sherlock Holmes makes mistakes um, yes , he actually has a chapter where he recaps other books he s written Each of these things might have been useful to touch on in an introduction, but expanding each out to its own chapter feels like clawing for page space.The re solving of the mystery itself is pretty great, albeit a fairly small part of the total book It takes a lot of things that didn t quite sit right with me when I was reading the novel, and fits them together in an alternate theory that holds up as a superior resolution to the mystery I would say, if you re interested in this book, pick it up and read the chapter where he details his alternate Baskervilles solution and skip the rest of it.Two stars


  5. Niklas Niklas says:

    Sadly, this is not a very amusing read Unlike The Physics of Superheroes , a book with a similar idea of applying real world reasoning to a world of fiction, this book takes itself a bit too seriously I will say however that when Bayard s version of the crime was fleshed out in the final chapters I could not disagree with his findings Annoying as it is, his theory does make a lot of sense.That having been said, his overall reasoning is flawed at best He makes assumptions based apparently so Sadly, this is not a very amusing read Unlike The Physics of Superheroes , a book with a similar idea of applying real world reasoning to a world of fiction, this book takes itself a bit too seriously I will say however that when Bayard s version of the crime was fleshed out in the final chapters I could not disagree with his findings Annoying as it is, his theory does make a lot of sense.That having been said, his overall reasoning is flawed at best He makes assumptions based apparently solely on the french translation of the book Which is, like the language itself, slightlyromanticized and makesallusions to the moon and the apparent wolf like properties of the Great Detective and are not apparent in the original English One would think Bayard would have omitted such parts had he found they dd not fit in with the original novel, as his reasoning stems a lotfrom how he believes Doyle felt about his creation than the narrative itself at times While there are, as previously stated no real flaws with Bayard s ultimate theory based on the narrative itself, his attitude towards both the reader and the original author is one of almost smug superiority He paints himself up as being wiser than most for having figured it all out A quality that would have been much better suited had his theory been based on facts and not an interpretation of a fictional story Regardless of how good it is


  6. Sammy Sammy says:

    Gosh, this book is an absurd flight of fancy, irritatingly smug, and sits at the opposite end of the literary theory spectrum to myself It is also, incidentally, well written and coherent within its own framework Bayard adopts the viewpoint of the 19th century school of literary theory somewhat back in vogue that characters can have a life beyond the page He argues forcefully for the fact that we all play some role in bringing characters to life, interpreting the gaps and lacunae in the aut Gosh, this book is an absurd flight of fancy, irritatingly smug, and sits at the opposite end of the literary theory spectrum to myself It is also, incidentally, well written and coherent within its own framework Bayard adopts the viewpoint of the 19th century school of literary theory somewhat back in vogue that characters can have a life beyond the page He argues forcefully for the fact that we all play some role in bringing characters to life, interpreting the gaps and lacunae in the author s descriptions and bringing our own biases with us He takes this theory further, arguing that it is dull to accept what the author tells us, and we must instead fashion our own work out of that on the page An intriguing theory that doesn t sit well with my New Criticism cum New Historicism viewpoints, but I m willing to let other opinions stand Without spoiling anything, Bayard s ultimate conclusion about what really happened in The Hound of the Baskervilles is quite clever, really He makes a convincing case that Holmes faulty reasoning and preconceived notions led to an incorrect conclusion, and he argues forcefully that readers love of Holmes since his conception goes beyond that of fans and a character That, in a sense, Conan Doyle created a character who outgrew him, who outgrew the world of fiction Undeniably this work in translation would have been better as a long essay than an entire volume The first 53 pages are a retelling of Conan Doyle s novel, which seems excessive The section on Conan Doyle s relationship with his character is entirely filler, if interesting historically Nevertheless, this is the book that we have, and thus it s the book I m reviewing Much of your feeling on this book will depend on how you take Bayard s own attitude Is he being wryly self aware or does he truly believe his own argument Evidently a lot of Goodreads reviewers are frustrated by the theorist arguing that characters experience lives we are not a part of I suspect Bayard knows exactly what he s doing, and is having fun with his own conceit He knows, as well as we do, that this is not possible, and that if Conan Doyle had intended for Holmes to get the case wrong, he would have made that clear Thus, we must approach the whole work within Bayard s own framework or there is no point reading it at all.From this point of view, the book is rather good On reflection, even the seemingly excessive chapters such as a deep analysis of the eponymous hound s mindset are relevant to the central argument This is a book that can inspire great literary debates as indeed it has in my friendship circle and for that we should be grateful Although the fact that Bayard has written three such books as this another on Hamlet and one on Agatha Christie s Roger Ackroyd may annoy literary elitists like myself, who would rather theorists devote themselves to exploring the texts themselves rather than making a career out of the spaces in between What am I saying If the work is one long con, it s a damn good one If it s completely serious, it s trash If it s somewhere in between, I suspect it s a cunning little argument that helped earn a writer some royalties, and it needn t be anythan that


  7. rixx rixx says:

    I m really very much not a fan of Sherlock Holmes Was Wrong Reopening the Case of The Hound of the Baskervilles by Pierre Bayard Spoilers ahead, though I won t spoil the proposed solution to the Baskerville case.The book s premise is this Doyle was so tilted by having to bring back Sherlock Holmes that he didn t correctly solve this case, because he was busy writing an evil associated, incompetent, absent Holmes The author proposes an alternate resolution, and shows plenty of sources f I m really very much not a fan of Sherlock Holmes Was Wrong Reopening the Case of The Hound of the Baskervilles by Pierre Bayard Spoilers ahead, though I won t spoil the proposed solution to the Baskerville case.The book s premise is this Doyle was so tilted by having to bring back Sherlock Holmes that he didn t correctly solve this case, because he was busy writing an evil associated, incompetent, absent Holmes The author proposes an alternate resolution, and shows plenty of sources for his judgement of both Doyle and Holmes This part of the book is fine Speculating about other plausible interpretations of a story, and addressing inconsistencies is fun I enjoyed the speculation, and the solution.The problem is well, this would have made a fine essay Or, you know, do what everybody else is doing and write fan fiction Instead, the author decided he was a fancy, intellectual scholar with his own school of literature interpretation So, before in true detective style we get a grand reveal in the end, we have to sit through a long, rambling, and condescending retelling of what the author thinks of literature Y know, generally Points for style because he teasers his other books he did a similar book on the Roger Ackroyd murder by Agatha Christie , complete with you ll have to buy them to find out my solution.I tend to trust translators, so I d like to place the blame for the Doylian, pretentious and condescending tone with the author Funnily enough, the translator doesn t only add the customary required footnotes, but also corrects the author s opinions where appropriate Bayard bases parts of his argument and comparison on associations provided by the French translation that aren t present in the English original.So all things considered A good idea that would have been enjoyable if it didn t take itself so goddamn seriously Write some fanfic, dude


  8. Rachel Rachel says:

    I made the mistake of thinking this book was a parody Unfortunately, it was not.While touted as a love letter to crime novels, this book seeks to destroy one of the best loved crime novels Basically, I got the impression that the author genuinely dislikes the Hound of the Baskervilles and wanted to re write the novel how he thought it should be written, because obviously Sir Arthur Conan Doyle the author didn t actually know who committed the crime On top of that, the author spent a lot o I made the mistake of thinking this book was a parody Unfortunately, it was not.While touted as a love letter to crime novels, this book seeks to destroy one of the best loved crime novels Basically, I got the impression that the author genuinely dislikes the Hound of the Baskervilles and wanted to re write the novel how he thought it should be written, because obviously Sir Arthur Conan Doyle the author didn t actually know who committed the crime On top of that, the author spent a lot of time trying to discredit Sherlock Holmes, not only during this mystery, but most of his work While trying to show how ridiculous his deductions were during the book, he credits other fictional work as scientific proof The book is slow going considering much of the book is either a summary of the ACD story or whole portions of the actual text.One thing not mentioned in the summary is that this reads like a book needed to pass a psychology class, the author attempting to explain how it was possible for Conan Doyle to miss the obvious And then trying to turn the Hound of the Baskervilles into a ghost story.Basically, if you didn t like the original story, go ahead and read this re opening But if you, like I, love the original story, don t waste your time


  9. LuAnn LuAnn says:

    Part literary criticism and fiction theory and part a dissection of Holmes deductions While the author has some plausible reasoning for who the real murderer was, he neglects explaining a major clue involving the ancestry of the novel s victims and killer which renders his argument insufficient While readers interested primarily interested in the analysis of HOUNd might find the literary criticism and fiction theory tedious and irrelevant, I found in them new ideas for exploring literarature Part literary criticism and fiction theory and part a dissection of Holmes deductions While the author has some plausible reasoning for who the real murderer was, he neglects explaining a major clue involving the ancestry of the novel s victims and killer which renders his argument insufficient While readers interested primarily interested in the analysis of HOUNd might find the literary criticism and fiction theory tedious and irrelevant, I found in them new ideas for exploring literarature As another reviewer points out, the author gives spoilers for two Agatha Christie mysteries that he fails to warn readers about


  10. Seth Seth says:

    Bayard, like many Sherlockians before him, conceives a clever alternative explanation to a Holmes story Unlike other Sherlockians before him, he sees the need to pointlessly steep his version in a watery broth of low grade literary theory A reader could skip the 140 pages leading up to the author s 40 page retelling and not have missed anything interesting except Bayard s translator inserting footnotes to point out errors in his reasoning It s fair justice to Bayard that my copy of this book, Bayard, like many Sherlockians before him, conceives a clever alternative explanation to a Holmes story Unlike other Sherlockians before him, he sees the need to pointlessly steep his version in a watery broth of low grade literary theory A reader could skip the 140 pages leading up to the author s 40 page retelling and not have missed anything interesting except Bayard s translator inserting footnotes to point out errors in his reasoning It s fair justice to Bayard that my copy of this book, bought for a 1 at my local library, is plastered across with a huge stamp that says WITHDRAWN


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *