Sherlock Holmes and The Princess Jewel

This is a play script for a 2-Act Sherlockian drama. It contains elements of “The Musgrave Ritual,” “The Adventure of the Dancing Men” and “The Final Problem.” It is always difficult for a reviewer to judge the interest of a play solely from reading the script. So much of the appeal of theater is derived from the performance arts of the cast, the vision and execution of the director and the work of the producer that the efforts of the playwright may well be overshadowed by the errors or mistakes of those involved in the performance.Given the above, this script is quite interesting. It will not be appealing to the general run of Sherlockians, who demand conformity to the Canon. As I said earlier, this script contains elements from several Canonical tales; however it also contradicts the Canon in many places, because the playwright has a different view of Sherlock than that commonly held. I found the script imaginative and appealing, but I am well-acquainted with the myriad of Sherlockian pastiches available and am prepared to accept alternative views of The Great Detective.Familiar elements, including Inspector Lestrade, Mrs. Hudson and Professor Moriarty as well as the code from ‘The Dancing Men’ and the Historical events leading up to “The Musgrave Ritual” are mixed somewhat differently to create a new view of Holmes and Watson. The similarities of English Sea Chantries and modern Rap performance are used to stage several scenes in a fashion at once familiar and traditional. The familiar badinage of deductions and amazement between Holmes and Watson is missing, but not really missed. This is a different Holmes and Watson with a different relationship.I would enjoy watching a performance, provided the actors and director were up to the task. It would not be Canonical, but it would be entertaining. In any case, the job of the Canonical Watson is to present Holmes, not to explain him. This Watson serves more as a foil for this Holmes who is well capable of presenting himself.The author, on the other hand, could use the services of a good editor. The dialogue contained a number of errors, mostly simple typos, but it also displays a strong American influence in its language and orientation. This is not really a good thing in presenting Sherlock to the audience. It is similar to casting a Brooklyn accent as Winston Churchill. A good producer could overcome these difficulties, but they do exist.Reviewed by: Philip K. Jones, March, 2012