How can you call Holmes fictional?. Review on Adventures Of Sherlock Holmes, The - Arthur Conan Doyle

My first experience of Doyle was ''The Hound of the Baskervilles''. After reading this great piece I have devoured every work involving the so called fictional hero ''Sherlock Holmes''. But from the day I started reading these stories to this day I firmly believe that Sherlock is not a piece of fiction. This was only further enhanced by the stories in ''The adventures of Sherlock Holmes''.

The methodology used by the great Holmes seem so down-to-earth yet so inconceivable to even the greatest geniuses. The reader is awestruck by the twists and the turns and how the great man is undeterred by it. As in all his other cases, Holmes succeeds as only success can. At the end of each story the reader is bound to be gasping for more. These stories are what I would call ''Good Addictions''.

The typical British setting, the vivid description of the climate, the people and the way of living create a sense that you are at that very place at that very moment. One crucial aspect is the relationship shared by Watson & Holmes. You cannot find such relations in today's materialistic world.

All in all I would say is that these stories cover every aspect of human life to such detail that to call it fictitious would be doing a lot of injustice to Doyle (and Holmes).