I think there is a difference between being troubled by the racism of the era and accusing Doyle of sharing it. I don't think the author is doing the latter, I think she is commenting on the invisibility (a more subtle form of racism but nonetheless prevalent) of the character, but more in the context of the OMC's overall experience of Victorian Oxford - which to me rings true, especially given what I've seen, when studying colonial history, of first person accounts by non-white peoples of the Empire.

I think this particular historical fiction IS successful in not merely stating "we were all wrong back then" - because some voices back then were also raised in criticism, they just didn't necessarily have the power to make themselves heard until they began to combine.