Before we start: Did you know that in his notes for ''A Study in Scarlet'', Doyle called his chief characters J. Sherrinford Holmes and Ormond Sacker? Yup, Ormond fucking Sacker. If you're ever in need of a good laugh, just remember that... 
 ''The Sign of the Four'' (1890) is the second novel featuring Sherlock Holmes written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, and boy, was it boooooring. But since my book reviews aren't necessarily about how my close-minded self enjoyed the novel, and more about what can be found in a story from a literary perspective, let's get into this. 
 How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. 
 It was a late summer evening in 1889 when Sir Arthur Conan Doyle sat down to dinner at the Langham Hotel in London with an American publishing agent who had come to commission new works of fiction for Lippincott's monthly magazine. 
 Oscar fucking Wilde was also at the table, and in mutual flattery they discussed such topics as future wars, of course. ;) By the end of the meal, the publishing agent, J. M. Stoddart, had tacked down what he had traveled all the way from Philadelphia for: commitments from Doyle and Wilde that each would write a short novel for Lippincott's. As a result, Wilde produced ''The Picture of Dorian Gray'' and Doyle the second appearance of Sherlock Holmes and Dr. John Watson, in ''The Sign of Four.'' 
 Rumour has it that the book's portrait of the fussy and hypochondriacal Thaddeaus Sholto is, in part, an affectionate caricature of Wilde. 
 The novel opens with the bizarre scene of the detective injecting himself with hypodermic syringe. ''Which is it today?'' Watson sarcastically inquires. ''Morphine or cocaine?'' To which Holmes languidely answers, ''It is cocaine,'' then adds, ''a seven-percent solution. Would you care to try it?'' As disturbing as this can seem to modern audiences, you have to bear in mind that back in the day cocaine was regularly prescribed for depression and that Holmes' mild dose would cost him only a few pennies. 
 In ''The Sign of the Four'' Mary Morstan brings Holmes several mysteries: What happened to her father after Captain Morstan arrived in London from military service in the East and suddenly vanished? Why has she received a lustrous pearl of great price on each of her birthdays over the past six years? Could there be any importance to a scrap of Indian paper inscribed with four interlinked crosses and the words ''the sign of the four''? (To this last, the contemporary response would be ''Duh.'') 
 The reason why his lenghtier novels fall rather flat for me, especially if I'm comparing them to his short stories, is that these book-lenght cases are structurally akward. Three contain protracted ''flashbacks'' that are effectively seperate stories in themselves - they recount the history of the person who committed the crime, and let me tell you, I didn't give two shits about them. These flashbacks are introduced after the offender is already caught, making every additional information on his past redundant. The reason why ''The Hound of the Baskervilles'' is my favorite Sherlock novel is that it is the only one that doesn't feature one of these extensive tailpieces. God bless. The accumulation of detail, however acurate and picturesque, doesn't vivify the tale, but nullifies it. 
 Moreover, I think that they are lazily written. Even by nineteenth-century standards, Conan Doyle could be an astonishingly facile writer. In this instance he signed the contract for ''The Sign of the Four'' on August 30, 1889 and delievered the manuscript just a month later. To complete a short story would seldom require more than a couple of days. Once the plot had been worked out, the actual writing was done in a single draft, with perhaps a few light corrections afterwards, and it shows. His stories don't flow well, the repetition of words become annoying with time, and (please don't shoot me) the deductions aren't all that clever. 
 Another reason why I had a hard time getting through this tale is its free expression of colonialist thoughts and racial prejudices. ''The Sign of the Four'' provides readers with valuable insights into late Victorian culture and contemporary attitudes held in response to the Indian Mutiny (Indian Rebellion of 1857). Doyle acknowledges both the fascination and fear commonly associated with British colonial enterprises. The novel clearly shows that late nineteenth-century British society continued to consider the colonies as attractive possessions. Doyle portrays India as an alluring and exotic milieu, which just made me really furious and uncomfortable. 
 Whereas the British had previously viewed colonial natives as innately subordinate and complicit, violent behaviors displayed within the Mutiny suggested that the 'primitive' nature of Eastern culture was intimately linked with criminal behavior. After the Mutiny, British society began to associate Eastern cultures with degeneracy, savagery, and brutality, all of which were attributions that encouraged popular fear of the colonies and of their inhabitants. ''The Sign of Four'' reflects Victorian society's pervasive apprehensions towards Eastern culture, as Doyle submits to popular beliefs which emphasized the relationship between foreign characteristics and criminality. This can be seen most prominently in Doyle's description of Tonga, as Watson recounts that, "His small eyes glowed and burned with a sombre light, and his thick lips were writhed back from his teeth, which grinned and chattered at us with half animal fury". There are many more of those stereotypical and harmful descriptions, and they really lowered my enjoyment of the story. 
 Doyle's portrayal of Tonga as primitive, animalistic and frightening is illustrative of the nineteenth- century British tendency to associate native physical characteristics with aggressive behavior. By incorporating such descriptions of natives without questioning their validity, ''The Sign of Four'' plays into Victorian' society's fear of the foreign, which is just a damn shame. 
 All of this sounded rather gloomy and depressing, and yeah, I won't hide the fact that I didn't particularly enjoy this tale, however, it had its moments. I loved the bits about John and Mary's relationship, and the subtlety in which their falling in love with one another was scattered throughout the story. 
 I loved comparing the book to the ongoing TV show, and seeing the little bits and pieces that they adopted, but slightly altered, e.g. Sherlock deducing from the watch that Watson was given by a relative, that it must have been from his brother who has a drinking problem, whereas in the show Sherlock was right about every fact, except that the inscribtion H.W. stood for Harriet Watson, turning Watson's ''brother'' into a sister. ;) 
 And it was just wonderful that the last scene of this novel build a bridge to the opening scene, with Watson remarking ''The division seems rather unfair. You have done all the work in this business. I get a wife out of it, Jones gets the credit, pray what remains for you?'' To which Sherlock replies, ''For me there still remains the cocaine bottle.'' 
 Oh my, I shouldn't be trash for a drug addict, or... should I? ;)