Oh Dear dept.
I was excited, last year, to see that Oxford were bringing out a second edition of its famous 'Oxford Sherlock Holmes' series. The first 90s editions were for many including myself their first window into the wider world of Doylean scholarship, and justifiably they became standard reference points. But the new second editions have started to come out. They are not a patch on the first. Aesthetically, one must admit they look better. The asterisks that denote footnotes are less obtrusive, the paper is great quality, the covers are well designed. The actual text of the stories remains the same, as far as I can tell. The problem is with the scholarly apparatus. For unlike the first editions, these have been edited not by fan-scholars (Owen Dudley Edwards, Christopher Roden, the late Richard Lancelyn Green) but by 'proper' academics. Do they bring to the table the latest in Doylean scholarship? Yes. But they also bring the latest in literary criticism and contemporary aca...