With the endless surge of adult-oriented sets, it is astonishing that Sherlock Holmes, the world's most famous detective, has not officially appeared in a LEGO® form – not even as a Gift with Purchase, similar to the Jules Verne set.
(1)(1)(1)(1).jpg)
Created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in 1887, Sherlock's influence in storytelling has been remarkable. Thus, it's brilliant to see that his LEGO debut is directly bound to books: LEGO® Icons set 10351 Sherlock Holmes: Book Nook is designed to be displayed among them.
Products in this article were gifted by The LEGO Group; the author's opinions are their own.
This article contains affiliate links to LEGO.com; we may get a small commission if you purchase.
10351 Sherlock Holmes: Book Nook
- Release date: 1 June 2025, pre3-order available now from the links below
- Pieces: 1359
- US$ 129.99 on LEGO.com US
- CA$ 149.99 on LEGO.com Canada
- GB£ 109.99 on LEGO.com UK
- AU$ 199.99 on LEGO.com Australia
- NZ$ .99 on LEGO.com New Zealand
- DE€ 119,99 on LEGO.com Deutschland
- NL€ 119,99 on LEGO.com Nederland
- FR€ 119,99 on LEGO.com France
- PLN 539.99 on LEGO.com Polska
- NOK 1649,90 on LEGO.com Norge
- DKK 999.95 on LEGO.com Danmark
The interesting parts
Recolours
(1)(1)(7).jpg)
- 5x Brick Special 1 x 1 with Stud on 1 Side in Dark Tan (6536855 | 87087)
- 2x Slope 18° 2 x 1 x 2/3 in Dark Bluish Gray (6533800 | 5404)
Two
different recolours; 7 pieces in total. Both of them are generally
useful, and I'm surprised that 1x1 SNOT brick took so long to
appear in dark tan – it's the 37th colour of the piece. I expect these
pieces will be available in other sets soon.
Prints
(1)(1)(4).jpg)
- 2x Tile 2 x 2 with Groove and "Moriarty Disappears" Newspaper print in White (6542016)
- Tile 1 x 3 with "Baker" print in Light Bluish Gray (6542014)
- Tile 1 x 3 with "Street" print in Light Bluish Gray (6542015)
Baker and Street tiles are crucial to the finished model, so it's nice that they're printed. I think they're useful on their own as well, maybe as a carved sign for an archaic bakery?
Rare parts
(1)(1)(6).jpg)
- Door 1 x 4 x 6 Smooth with Chamfered Handle Plinth in Black (6400373 | 35291) – also in 7640812 Grimmauld Place
- Tile Round 1 x 2 Half Circle in Bright Green (6536989 | 1748) – with 1 extra, also in 77247 KICK Sauber F1 Team C44 Race Car
- Wedge Plate 12 x 3 Right in Dark Orange (6533065 | 47398) also in 21354 Twilight The Cullen House (read our review of set 21354 by Zachary Hill)
- 6x Brick Curved 1 x 4 x 2/3 Double, No Studs in Dark Bluish Gray (6485348 | 79756) – in 2 other sets
The rare assortment is small as well, with nothing too exciting.
Sticker sheet
(1)(1).jpg)
Some of the stickers feature physical objects, similar to sheets in many LEGO® Friends sets. I generally dislike this, but it's understandable in the tight spaces of this peculiar model. Many Easter eggs and references are hidden in these stickers.
Elementary Bookshop is fun, of course; I wonder if I could find a "New" decorated tile to go with it…
New Elementary, dear Watson
.jpg)
First, our dynamic duo: Doctor Watson and Sherlock Holmes. Their new pieces are:
- Hat, Bowler in Dark Brown (6554634 | 95674) – recolour
- Head Watson in Nougat (6542009) – new print
.jpg)
- Hat, Deerhunter Cap, Plain in Dark Tan (6543864 | 7425) – new mould variant
- Torso Sherlock in Tan (6554633) – new print
.jpg)
The deerstalker hat appeared previously in LEGO® Minifigures Series 5 Detective, also known as definitely-not-Sherlock-Holmes, with a print (4632323). The mould has been updated slightly: keen-eyed readers will notice that the lower corners of the ear flaps are a little more rounded in the new version. Furthermore, the creases are more distinct on the new variant.
.jpg)
Irene Adler, from Scandal in Bohemia, sports a new medium lavender dress:
- Neckwear Cape Collar, High Rounded in Dark Purple (6561001 | 20551) – recolour
- Torso Adler in Medium Lavender (6554749) – new print
- Skirt Adler in Medium Lavender (6542013) – new print
.jpg)
Paige is one of Sherlock's local young informants, and Moriarty is his nemesis. Paige consists of existing parts, including the torso of Peregrin Took, but Moriarty gets new head and jacket:
- Head Moriarty in Warm Tan (6542011)
- Torso Moriarty in Black (6554746)
Building Baker Street
.jpg)
The build process for the model is very straightforward. There are some interesting angles used to create the narrowing alley space when the nook is closed, but generally the build is mostly about stacking bricks. Heck, the process took me back to my childhood sets of the early 2000s, with their walls of mixed panels, regular bricks and tall bricks.
Now, there isn't anything wrong with that, but sets are generally technically interesting to build these days, so I was mildly surprised by this.
The architecture looks like a plausible rendition of downtown Victorian London.
.jpg)
Baker Street has a hinge in the middle, cleaving the window of the central building in an amusing fashion.
The iconic 221B (shown above right) is the best of the three buildings, slightly reminiscent of the location used in the BBC series Sherlock created by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss. The semicircular window above the doorway, the simple pattern of masonry bricks, and the little lanterns create a credible atmosphere. The stickered door is a letdown, though; it's missing one panel to make room for the knob stud, and feels half-hearted.
Nonetheless, this definitely lacks the wow factor of the best Modular Buildings, for example; this is especially apparent on the lame "roof", represented by one layer of 2x4 slopes. However, this is less regrettable in this particular set, as it's designed to be closed and displayed amidst books – with the general atmosphere being more important than intricate architectural details!
But before we process onto the bookshelf, let's check for clues and secrets.
.jpg)
The bay window of the bookshop turns, revealing a mediocre secret of dog food and a letter. I wish the bay window had a better plinth.
There's a stickered bookshelf behind the door. The placement is bizarre and the sticker detail is far less interesting than a brick-built one would have been, especially as it's crudely split between two panels. But maybe there's some amusement in having a bookshelf with a small bookshop with a sticker of a bookshelf in it? I feel there's a missed opportunity of depicting this set in the graphics.
.jpg)
The middle building has a gear function that lifts the door, revealing Moriarty, the Napoleon of Crime. This, again, takes me back to my childhood sets, namely LEGO® Star Wars ones.
.jpg)
With almost its whole upper wall able to swing open, 221B has the best interior. The 3D brick-built furniture (or should that be 2.5D?) is delightful and the violin is a welcome addition as well. The clue board and the Reichenbach Falls paintings work well as stickers – I wish the two small lamps were physical, though. I applied this sticker upside down – oops! Not intentional. The lamps felt more natural this way, but the painting looks a bit odd.
The coat rack, weirdly positioned quite high up behind the door, is less successful.
.jpg)
Once the book is closed, Baker meets Street and the facades are only seen from a narrow street perspective. The effect is excellent.
.jpg)
And the effect is even better when inserted between books, as intended. The sudden, cavern-like space in the middle of books is delightful.
.jpg)
Although usually unseen, the front-side cover has the iconic silhouette of the famous detective. I was initially skeptical of this, being afraid that the studded surface would make the composition too noisy. Fortunately, the stark colour contrast between tan and black makes it sharp and neat. The pipe has been omitted.
.jpg)
This is the side they don't want you to see.
Conclusion
.jpg)
I think it's a brilliant idea to make the Sherlock set as a book nook. It makes a fascinating, slightly mysterious display, and doesn't require a huge amount of space. I also suppose that people who don't have a bookshelf don't need a Sherlock Holmes set, so there shouldn't be a problem.
As a minifigure set it's good, as a parts pack it's worse than average – although the value of 1359 parts and 5 minifigures for US$129.99/ £109.99/ 119.99€/ AU$199.99 is actually pretty good. There aren't any exciting techniques, and the architecture could be more ambitious.
These are not crucial weaknesses in the finished build, certainly when seen as a shadowed alley; hiding the shortcomings and boosting the atmosphere. In short, it's a successful set for Sherlock Holmes fans. Others can skip it – and wait for a book nook set that fits their interests! Or a DVD nook, a VHS nook, or a 12 inch LP nook… This idea is neat, and I hope they'll make more. Maybe I'll make some of my own designs – I definitely have books to accompany.
Pre-order now; available 1 June 2025
READ MORE: Go from Holmes to Homer: our review of 10352 The Simpsons™: Krusty Burger
Help New Elementary keep publishing articles like this. Become a Patron!
A huge thank you to all our patrons for your support, especially our 'Vibrant Coral' tier: London AFOLs, Antonio Serra, Beyond the Brick, Huw Millington, Dave Schefcik, David and Breda Fennell, Gerald Lasser, Baixo LMmodels, Sue Ann Barber and Trevor Clark, Markus Rollbühler, Elspeth De Montes, Megan Lum, Andy Price, Chuck Hagenbuch, Jf, Wayne R. Tyler, Daniel Church, Lukas Kurth (StoneWars), Timo Luehnen, Chris Wight, Jonathan Breidert, Brick Owl, BrickCats, Erin and Dale and our newest top-tier patron, Thunderdave! You folks are better than inverted cheese slopes.
All text and images are ©2025 New Elementary unless otherwise attributed.
Did TLG give a reason why they decided to use darker skin tones for characters that have been historically and consistently not been portrayed by people of color? I don't recall any specific descriptions in any of the stories noting that particular quality other than Watson being "brown as a nut" after a stay in Afghanistan. But it has been some forty years since I last read them. Interesting set and cool idea otherwise.
ReplyDeleteI guess it's just to add diversity. Due to the rest of the model looking very Victorian and Lego being a corporate behemoth, it does come across as somewhat forced, though.
DeleteOh well, it's Lego, so if it would really bother anyone, it'd be easy to switch out the heads and hands for other parts, I guess. At least, the heads would be useful in a lot of other contexts...
Hasn't one of Lego themes for the last few years been "Divere Together"
DeletePlus, it is Britain, where they conquered/colonoized/imported people from all over. So Mixed skin tones make sense.
I like it!
Actually, it doesn't make sense given the fact that Holmes has extraordinary powers of observation. Failing to make note of obvious and noteworthy skin color subtracts from HIS character rather than adds to diversity. Additionally, most people of color were employed as servants or dock workers during Victorian London, making these important characters people of color is dishonest to the visions of Doyle and history itself. His characters always have a unique ability to blend seamlessly into the social circles all the stories are centered around, having an easy to spot skin color would make for very little detective work, if any. When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the... Oh wait, there's the criminal right over there. ???
DeleteI'm all for different skin tones as well; however, I find it difficult to see this as simply "somewhat forced" but rather unnecessarily deceitful. I like the set, and I like the skin colors; however, I like the characters and stories of Sherlock Holmes more. These do a disservice to them more than any celebration. Perhaps the classic yellow minifig would have suited the set far better.
I mean, as you mentioned, Holmes clearly DID notice Watson's skin tone immediately when they first met, so clearly that's not what you're taking issue with. And the only other dark-skinned character in the set is Irene Adler: an American woman who traveled Europe as an opera singer — like MULTIPLE black women did around this time in history! If Holmes found it unusual for black foreigners to find that sort of fame and success in the performing arts, that would've been uncharacteristically naive of him.
DeleteAt no point during the sole adventure where Holmes and Adler crossed paths did he have any trouble picking her out of a crowd or anything like you suggest. And the one time in the story that she successfully conceals her identity from Holmes, it is at night, while disguised as a man, without Holmes ever seeing her face! So how would her skin color in any way impede that particular style of subterfuge?
Even the story's title, "A Scandal in Bohemia", relates to a prior affair she had with a Bohemian monarch, who considers her beautiful and brilliant but far below his station, and hires Holmes to keep their out-of-wedlock tryst from becoming public knowledge and threatening his upcoming wedding to a fellow aristocrat. How is any of that at odds with her being a black woman? It seems to me like that detail fits the facts of the story pretty effortlessly.
Again, Holmes' powers of observation are extraordinary, missing that detail only subtracts from his character and his abilities.
DeleteSkin color is a distinguishable feature still used as a simple and instant means of identifying anyone if they are a suspect of a crime or a person of interest to any detective, especially "the most perfect reasoning and OBSERVING machine that the world has seen." Since there was never any note of such an important and relevant detail, and the characters are able to blend seamlessly into the society in which they all move, even disguised as a man, by default, they must have been Caucasian. In Victorian London, that aristocratic society would have been almost entirely Caucasian as people of color were found primarily in the lower classes of laborers, servants, and dock workers.
This is not just simple history and original vision, it's also basic math. Yes, there were black opera singers that travelled from America, but that was a very, VERY short list (again, not much detective work required.) Her ability to blend in and not be seen is due to her brilliant mind and her own abilities and skills as an actress, making her black would negate any possibility of anonymity in a crowd of white men. In the dark. Without Holmes even seeing her face. Your assertion that being black would not impede the subterfuge just doesn't make any bit of sense. And as an aside, Irene Adler is believed to be based on Lillie Langtry, The Jersey Lily, who was white.
Regarding the story itself, while interracial marriage was not taboo, it was definitely not widespread (granted, Mr. Rochester did marry Bertha, but that's a different book), so, while an "out-of-wedlock tryst" would have been scandalous in itself, an interracial one would have been highly controversial and newsworthy considering the person she has the tryst with is the King of Bohemia who was set to marry a Scandinavian Princess. Downplaying the story fails the intent of Doyle to portray the importance of specifically hiring Holmes, which, by the way, is another disservice to his character.
Finally, a black Irene Adler has never existed. She has always been portrayed in every interpretation as white. Doyle's lack of a description saying that she was black makes her white. That is just how it is. Nothing racist, nothing bigoted, nothing derogatory. Only characters acting in a specific setting without any identifying skin tone of note. By default, they are white. It's nothing to be ashamed of, nor is it something to be proud of. The stories are simply a product of their time and place. Altering them will not make it then acceptable for a modern audience, it will only damage the original vision and lessen the abilities of the wonderful character of Sherlock Holmes.
BUT, it is what it is. TLG made that choice. Irene Adler is now for the first time black. What is next? Huckleberry Finn is now a girl. Atticus Finch is now homosexual. Scarlett Ohara is now Hispanic. Details like that don't sound effortless, they sound destructive, unnecessary, and dishonest. It's a bad call that I am very curious, and confused, as to why it was made.
"the characters are able to blend seamlessly into the society in which they all move, even disguised as a man, by default, they must have been Caucasian."
DeleteSorry, at what point does Adler 'blend seamlessly into aristocratic society'? Most of the time she makes no attempt at anonymity, and is regarded as a beautiful, musically-talented foreigner. The one time she disguises herself it's as a man, so even if anybody DID do a momentary double take at her skin color, they'd hardly suspect her of being a famous female opera singer (and regardless of how you imagine Adler's skin tone, Holmes never bothered questioning any other passersby that one night, so he evidently wasn't concerned about whether they'd noticed anything amiss about the stranger who'd wished him good night).
"so, while an "out-of-wedlock tryst" would have been scandalous in itself, an interracial one would have been highly controversial and newsworthy considering the person she has the tryst with is the King of Bohemia who was set to marry a Scandinavian Princess."
That was exactly my point. It reinforces the King's motivation to keep that prior relationship secret. It's absurd to act like raising the stakes somehow ruins the story, regardless of whether it aligns with Doyle's intent.
"The stories are simply a product of their time and place. Altering them will not make it then acceptable for a modern audience, it will only damage the original vision and lessen the abilities of the wonderful character of Sherlock Holmes."
And yet, other Holmes portrayals and adaptations have taken far more extreme departures from the source material than changing the race of one character, and the reputations of Sherlock Holmes himself and of Doyle's stories are still as strong as ever.
You are free to like or dislike any particular portrayal for any reason, but it's absurd to act like it's somehow a travesty for creators in a different time and place to take creative liberties with stories written over a century ago. I myself am a huge fan of L. Frank Baum's Oz books, and learned years ago to appreciate seeing different creators' takes on that universe years ago, whether or not they align with "canon" or with my own personal preferences. You could probably stand to learn that lesson yourself.
One final note: Moriarty's appearance in this set EXPRESSLY CONTRADICTS how Holmes describes him in Doyle's stories: he has stubble and a slight tan, rather than being "clean-shaven, pale, and ascetic-looking". And yet somehow, despite writing several multi-paragraph rants about the disrespect of deviating even from unwritten implications in the original stories (along with passive-aggressive whining in response to reviews of ENTIRELY UNRELATED sets), you haven't once mentioned this as a disrespect to either Doyle's writing or Holmes's powers of observation!
DeleteSo suffice to say, your feeble insistence that "This is NOT a debate about race… It is about making Holmes just another shlub like the rest of the detectives by TLG clearly not understanding the stories or his character." rings a bit hollow. Just drop the pretense at this point — you're only embarrassing yourself.
Dial it down, Skye. I'm not the target, my arguments are. Keep your attacks aimed at them. And by the way, I used the encompassing plural forms to include Professor Moriarty, Dr. John Watson, and Irene Adler in my very first sentence at the top here by stating, "...darker skin tone'S' for character'S'..."
DeleteI'm just going to ask a simple question.
Why was it important to note Dr. Watson was "brown as a nut" and not say the same of Irene Adler if she was also?
The answer to that is extremely obvious. When Stamford describes Watson as "thin as a lath and brown as a nut", he's expressing dismay at how different Watson looks since his time in Afghanistan, and when Sherlock Holmes mentions his dark skin, it's as part of a demonstration of how he deduced so much of Watson's backstory from superficial details when they first met.
DeleteBy contrast, Holmes is already familiar with Irene Adler, and has a file on her covering everything from the place and year of her birth to the details of her career to where she currently lives. Her appearance doesn't tell him anything about her background beyond what he already knows.
Moreover, the story goes out of its way to emphasize Holmes's indifference to Adler's appearance, whereas most other characters in the story can scarcely mention her without praising her beauty. This reinforces Watson's characterization of Holmes at the start of the story — he is not the least bit attracted to women romantically or aesthetically as most other men are, and Adler alone ultimately earns his admiration and an esteemed place in his memory through her wit and intellect.
I'll grant that you might have been including Moriarty when criticizing the set's skin tones, but never have you mentioned his stubble, which is just as big a contradiction. And your passive-aggressive replies to more recent reviews have also fixated on the presence or absence of people of color, so it's not much of a leap to say your grievances are primarily about race.
Maybe it upsets you for me to make inferences about you based on your comments, but because you're posting anonymously, your comments are the only window I have into who you are. And so far, those comments paint a picture of a nuisance who delights in starting heated arguments that get comment threads shut down. A troublemaker who has been accused of racism multiple times by multiple people and never questions why so many other people would independently arrive at that conclusion. A fanatic so aggrieved about this one set that you think it's worth derailing the comments of multiple entirely unrelated reviews with faux concern just so you can re-litigate this same argument over and over again.
I've already frankly given your comments a lot more time and attention than you seem to deserve. If you truly believe I'm wrong, and that either you OR your arguments deserve more respect than has been given, try behaving less like a troll and more like somebody worthy of respect.
Dear, dear Skye, I am truly far from upset, in fact I have presented my arguments as unemotionally as possible. I have also not practiced insulting anyone or name-calling for debating my arguments nor shall I ever do so, not even passive aggressively. By contrast however, my being "accused of racism multiple times by multiple people" and "so many other people" concluding the same has only come from two people sharing the name Barnick. Considering I have not made any comment that could be considered racist and would challenge you to provide any examples, the notion stands only to damage your own credibility. However, if by your definition you find that questioning TLG decision to change characters' appearances without precedent or reason to be racist, then I will wear that moniker proudly because I grew up preferring questions with no answer to answers with no question. And now we can add to the list with nuisance, troublemaker, fanatic, and even troll. Okay. And water makes its own sauce. I guess I'm just a fly in the ointment, a monkey in the wrench. As to my posting as "anonymous", well that's just simply a product of my laziness. But if it'll make you feel better, you can call me... Roy.
DeleteWhich, returning to the topic at hand, leads to your answer to my question above. That entire first paragraph is a true delight. What you call "superficial details" seem to be elementary (couldn't resist) to demonstrate Holmes' powers of deduction. That "extremely obvious" observation is the foundation of his conclusions. And they were spot on. Not mentioning it about The Woman says that any such revelatory deductions are now irrelevant, contradicting his nature and abilities. As you note, the overemphasis of Holmes' disinterest in her appearance is based on her extreme beauty. This was done to show that Holmes could not be persuaded or influenced by her notable appeal as all others were collectively enchanted by it. To not mention skin color as a means of deduction callously casts aside a very important tool in his arsenal as proven above. Additionally, your own curiosity as to my name somehow helping you see into who I am is a beautifully ironic bit of a deductive exercise that would seem important and mimic Holmes' own propensities. So, tell me what you deduce from my name? How about where I'm from? (Oakland, California by the way.) What else? Height? 6'0'. Weight? 145 lbs. (Yup, lanky to the core.) Do I love sequined shirts? Without a doubt! Would it be more informative if I were to tell you that I am a person of color or did you assume me to be white? Would your perspective of my comments change as a result? Would you like a bit "more time and attention" to go through them again, maybe quote any racist remarks while you're at it?
Dark tan snot, I might pass out from joy
ReplyDelete