Pastiche versus Legend

 Got into a little debate this morning about what constitutes a Sherlock Holmes "pastiche," and since I've got time to kill, I thought I'd muse about it a bit further. Part of the fun of Sherlockiana for me has always been puzzling over aspects of this hobby of ours, and pastiches have always been a topic for discussion.

Remember back in the 1980s, when all sorts of commercial authors were finding Watson manuscripts in old houses and bank vaults all over the place? If you're lucky, you're not that old and don't remember that time, which means you're a lot less achey than some of us who do. But Watson was "writing" a whole lot of stories about Sherlock Holmes then -- though curiously, not as much as now, even though they don't sell as well.

Case in point, I was in a wonderful old bookstore yesterday and saw a nice little gathering of Sherlock Holmes books I had never heard of nor see before. Once upon a time, this would have been a cause for great excitement, but yesterday I walked away without a single one in hand. Pastiches are now like a raving Sherlock's oysters, so prolific they threaten to overrun the world. Fledgling writers have always taken first steps by emulating favorite authors, and, man, do we seem to have a lot of fledgling writers these days, pretending to be John H. Watson.

But here's the thing, we have a whole lot of writers today that aren't attempting to mimic John H. Watson (or Arthur Conan Doyle, if that is the church of your choice), but still writing about Sherlock Holmes, and that's where I start having questions. If someone loves the BBC Sherlock characters and writes a third-person Omegaverse novel about John, Sherlock, Mycroft, and friends . . . well, we have definitely strayed far from anything recognizable as a pastiche of Watson/Doyle's works. And what of Sherlock Holmes in the 22nd Century? (Got that earworm in your head now? You're welcome.)

At this point, I think we're talking legend. At this point, I think we're talking about telling the story of Holmes around the campfire to those who haven't heard of that mythical figure who could take the crazy and put it in order. Conan Doyle may have originated the myth, but as the tellers of tales diversify and no longer use Watson narration or the written word to pass the legend along, the word "pastiche" in its dictionary definition, is too small to hold what is going on. 

And, okay, I'll say it . . . after forty-five years or so in this hobby, true pastiches are a bore to me, which is why I didn't pick up any books from that shelf I wrote about a few paragraphs ago. I love a fresh adaptation -- the Sherlock & Co. podcast, the CBS Watson TV series (Morris Chestnut > Jonny Lee Miller), and anything else that plays with the mythos in ways that make it fresh to my old eyes. I'm into the legend more than the pastiche at this point, but I know pastiches are still wonderful things for those who didn't consume their fill years ago, or those who like to hew as close to the originals as possible. They just aren't everything.

And Sherlock Holmes? Definitely legend.

Sherlockiana, born of tough times

 I love timelines a bit too much. So let's toss one together real quick.

1928 . . . Essays in Satire by Ronald Knox published, containing "Some Studies in the Literature of Sherlock Holmes"

October 1929 . . . A stock market crash spurs a decade-long economic depression. The United States and the United Kingdom are among the hardest hit. (Germany, too, which might cause issues later.) Alcoholic beverages still illegal in United States due to Prohibition.

Also 1929 . . .  A Note on the Watson Problem by S.C. Roberts published.

1930 . . . Doubleday first publishes The Complete Sherlock Holmes.

1931 . . .  Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson by H. W. Bell published.

Also 1931 . . . Sherlock Holmes: Fact or Fiction by T. S. Blakeney published. (Between Bell and Blakeney this was the point when Sherlockian chronology really takes off.)

January 1933 . . . Adolph Hitler becomes chancellor of Germany.

March 1933 . . . Prohibition era ends in America.

Also 1933 . . . The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes by Vincent Starrett published.

June 1934 . . . The first meeting of the Baker Street Irregulars at Christ Cella's restaurant. (Yes, June. And with no air conditioning.)

Also 1934, the first wave of drought that would cause the Dust Bowl and agricultural depression in the United States and Canada.

Also 1934 . . . The original Sherlock Holmes Society forms in London.

May 1937 . . . The Hindenberg explodes and we're done with Zeppelin travel.

March 1939 . . . The Hound of the Baskervilles with Basil Rathbone released.

September 1939 . . . World War Two starts.

1940 . . . 221B: Studies in Sherlock Holmes, edited by Vincent Starrett, published.

1942 . . . Vincent Starrett writes the poem "221B"

Going to stop there, as with the end of World War Two, Sherlockiana really takes off. The Baker Street Journal begins publishing in 1946, the same year as the last Basil Rathbone movie about Sherlock Holmes. (Something to ponder: Would we have original series of The Baker Street Journal without the Basil Rathbone wave of Sherlock popularity?)

Sherlockians have lived and Sherlocked through some real shit. It seemed like a point that becomes more relevant lately, so this morning seemed like a good time to do a little stroll through history.

On with the hobby . . .

Here's to the local Sherlockian!

This spring, a lot of us are pondering our local Sherlock Holmes societies, inspired, I suspect by the coming BSI Midwest Canonical Conclave. We've gotten a few more details on the program at this point, which celebrate the local societies in many ways, but when it comes down to the attendance, I don't know if we'll be seeing many local scion members outside of those based in the city where it's being held. I could, of course, be wrong.

Local scion members, those Sherlockians whose love to discuss the stories and shows with others, but don't really want to leave town for a conference, are a breed of Sherlockian that I have learned to really appreciate as the decades passed. In my first decade or two, all of the really cool stuff seemed to be at the regional or national level, where the full-tilt, obsessive, all-in Sherlockians gather. But at some point I came to realize that I wasn't hearing as many new perspectives on Holmes from those who were travelling the same diehard paths. The BBC Sherlock wave brought some new blood and new perspectives, but often the focus there was on the adaptations -- though so many dove straight into the source material to gather all the info on Holmes and his posse as possible. (We harvested some GREAT Sherlockians in the 2010s. Oops, "harvested" sounds a little serial-killery, doesn't it. "Gained," okay? But so boring a word . . .)

The more casual fans, the sort that are satisfied with local discussions, not necessarily subscribing to The Baker Street Journal or jumping on Barque Lone Star Zooms, can have some fresh, unique angles on our  aged Canon and will observe points grown too familiar to some of us to see clearly. 

Lately, as Zoom has become a standby, a lot of local Sherlock Holmes societies are getting more and more visitors from other societies. But that comes with a cost -- local voices can be less apt to speak up if some know-it-all from far away is Zooming in. We saw it happen with our Peoria group and left Zoom as soon as it was safe. Some groups seem to balance things pretty well. The Parallel Case of St. Louis alternates live meetings with Zoom, and I think that encourages local voices.

It's good for our local groups to have ties to the larger Sherlockian world, providing pathways for those who do want to explore other groups, larger events, and the vast array of connections we have in this hobby. But it's also important to let them be who they are. They don't just feed our hobby new Sherlockians for the upper echelons, they also provide us unique inspirations and ideas from folks who don't know what they don't know. And remaining local Sherlockians seems to suit a lot of folks just fine.

The month's Midwest BSI Canonical Conclave of Scion Societies will be an interesting experiment in Sherlockian society interactions. The now-expected influx of curious Sherlockians from outside the midwest may give it a somewhat different flavor than the title implies, and we may not be electing the Sherlockian pope of the midwest, but hopefully it will result in good things for all our local Sherlockian friends who are just happy being where they are.

Because at the end of the day, local is where we tend to spend most of our time.

Johnlock vs. BSI

 There was an interesting article on Wired this morning (Editor's Note: Many mornings ago, as I try to finally finish this blog post), about the new Captain America movie and the current state of the once-mighty "Stucky" ship. Those last few words are going to be Greek to many a Sherlockian, being both from a different fandom and a medium traditional Sherlockians haven't been into as often. And shipping. For those who need the explanation, "Stucky" is the "Johnlock" of the Marvel Cinematic Universe pairing Steve Rogers and Bucky Barnes. Which brings me back to Johnlock, which was what that Wired article would term "a juggernaut ship."

Ten years ago, Johnlockers were an incredible movement of fans around Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. Younger, female fans. The traditional Sherlock Holmes fandom, to whom the letters "BSI" are so important in America, didn't have much interest in that surge, even while constantly concerned about how its fandom was aging, and supporting causes to get school kids into Sherlock Holmes. Even after admitting that women could be in their more rarified circles in 1991, the bones of the old, male fandom still propped up the BSI structure, and the leadership was definitely more interested in looking back than curiously looking forward.

There has always been a very conservative streak in Baker Street Irregular-ity, and an unwillingness to color outside the lines in its devotion to the Original Canon. CBS's new Watson show has met with harsher criticism than it deserves by many on that front, which is completely what one would expect. It's just what an elder fandom does, be it Doctor Who, Star Wars, or Dark Shadows. (Hey, maybe the Dark Shadows fans are down to a scant few, but they had their day.) Nothing is ever as good as when you were first into it. But Sherlockiana takes that a step further. We diehards anchor ourselves on stories that were being read two centuries before. Of course we trend conservative.

There are two events this year that are really bringing out the changes in Sherlock Holmes fandom, and they both occur in April. One is possibly the last 221B Con in Atlanta, a gathering originally fueled by BBC Sherlock fandom, and the other is the brand new "Midwest BSI Canonical Conclave of Scion Societies." The former is winding down because it can't exist in its previous form with attendee numbers under a few hundred, the latter is a hopeful build-up in a realm where a hundred attendees is a terrific success. The demographics of the two events are going to be interesting -- 221B Con's population came from outside traditional Sherlockian circles. Those attracted to anything with the letters "BSI"  in the past have trended as old school as old school can be. But the times, they are a-changing.

Those who have only discovered the joys of 221B Con in recent years have a hard time understanding what the con was at its peak, and, sadly, most Sherlockians of a certain age or older will never know what they missed. We had a period of excitement and creativity surrounding Sherlock Holmes like nothing in the century-plus of his existence. The amount of material on AO3 alone with a "Sherlock Holmes" tag pulls in around nine thousand entries, and that was just one venue where the post-Sherlock boom saw works explode. Johnlock was a huge part of that, with many a rare pairing of other characters following in its wake. More non-male fans being drawn in by the popularity of a younger Holmes and Watson caused their relationship to gain more of a focus in our fandom as a whole.

And as the Johnlock wave recedes and its remaining members settle into our more traditional Sherlock Holmes fan venues, it's very easy to see the energy and life that the last decade have brought into our fan culture. CBS wouldn't be running Watson right now without Elementary preceding it and Elementary would have never existed without BBC Sherlock. And every TV show and movie incarnation causes a few more people to want to read the original Canon and bring their take on Holmes and Watson to our fandom. (An established fandom with many a truly scholarly wing to it, but a fandom none the less, despite certain failed efforts to claim it otherwise.) Without that energy, I doubt there would be a Midwest BSI Canonical Conclave, a statement that I'm sure many a traditionalist will argue.

But sometimes, one has to step outside the bubble and take a long look at where we are in our Sherlockian hobby. And even then, it's hard to see it all and express what one sees, which is probably why this post has been gestating for about three or four weeks. And on we roll.

A Bit of the Pre-Internet Sherlockian Life

 This morning I discovered a time bomb left by someone in my household forty years ago.

It was a large scrapbook in which they had inserted Sherlock Holmes related clippings and paper paraphernalia between the pages, plainly intending to paste them in eventually.

Here's a sample . . .

The full stack is almost an inch deep.

Deerstalkers abound, amid actual articles about Sherlockians, headlines that sound like they're about Sherlock or Watson but are really about boxer Larry Holmes or golfer Tom Watson, and a dozen other related topics. Want to improve your child's reading by using a TRS-80 Color Computer? There's a $14.95 program on a tape cassette to help them through The Hound of the Baskervilles! All those things that today we would share a link or a pic on social media to amuse our Sherlockian friends, all clipped and collected -- things that many a mailed-out newsletter would pass along as well.

A few bits, like a tiny John Bennett Shaw news clipping, evoke memories of events. Others, like the program for a Hound of the Baskervilles play that I know we saw in Chillicothe, Illinois, are long forgotten. How an AP newswire printout on Conan Doyle's self-experimentation with something called gelsemium made it into our hands, I have no idea, other than all the friends I had in the newspaper industry back then. (That was about Alvin Rodin and Jack Key publishing an article in the Journal of American Medicine, by the way, if you want to to down that rabbit hole.) 

The schedule for "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" on WCBU public radio, starting with a three part adaptation of A Study in Scarlet. A TV Guide clipping about Peter Lawford as Sherlock Holmes and Mel Ferrer as Professor Moriarty soon to appear on Fantasy Island. The Ballymote Tape Library, out of Bayshore, New York, offering "Buy any 4, get 1 FREE!" tape cassettes of Rathbone/Bruce and Gielgud/Richardson radio shows. It's a veritable time capsule of Sherlock Holmes's influence and reach on the 1980s.

A 1985 Hardee's Huckleberry Hound Action Meal box, with Funslide(TM!) Card? That's in there two. We're much less concerned with random characters wearing deerstalkers in 2025, with a wealth of Sherlock Holmes related content available at the ease of a Google search, but in 1985, seeing Huckleberry Hound dress up like Sherlock Holmes was a moment worth noting. It was a different world.

I was doing some serious cleaning when I stumbled across this view of the past and am going to have to force myself to walk away from it for now just to keep at my task -- a busy Saturday ahead! But I had to stop and share a little bit before moving on. 

Sherlock Holmes's Regulars

 As someone given to pondering the structure of our Sherlock Holmes fandom and the levels of participation we see from fans of the great detective, I've been watching the Midwest BSI Canonical Conclave with great interest. What is the "Midwest BSI Canonical Conclave," you ask?

That's been a puzzle many of us have been pondering, even as we signed up to attend it. A recent FAQ sent out about the event gave a little more explanation gave a bit more info, parsing it out from local scion meetings, regional conferences, and the big kahuna weekend in New York City every January. The best brief description of the Conclave is "a super-sized multi-group scion society meeting." One almost pictures something like that congress of gangs in the old movie "The Warriors," so well reproduced in an episode of "What We Do In The Shadows" last year.

That would be the dream, I think, seeing a decent and fairly equal representation from all of the Sherlockian clubs of the midwest. But in practice, I'm wondering if our local scions will see any more of our members attending than make the effort to go to the regional conferences. As the Conclave FAQ explains, scion societies are the feeder clubs to both regional conferences and the birthday weekend in New York. Most local clubs only have a few members who make the leap to subscribing to The Baker Street Journal, much less hit Dayton, Minneapolis, or New York.

One interesting tell is the folks outside of the midwest who have expressed interest in the Indianapolis event -- the same folks you see almost everywhere, the Sherlock Holmes "Regulars." They'll be in New York. They'll be in Minneapolis. The best of them will be in Dayton, St. Louis, or any city where you're having a full-on weekend conference. And the most-most dedicated hit multiple scion meetings a month as well. We know we'll see them at the first of these Conclaves, even if they're not in the midwest. And if a similar event occurs in California or Philadelphia, they'll probably be there too.

The Canonical description of a Baker Street irregular is "These youngsters, however, go everywhere and hear everything. The are as sharp as needles, too, all they want is organization."

Which kind of inspires one to wonder -- what if someone did organize those uber-Sherlockians? The annual dinner of the capital "I" Baker Street Irregulars does eventually honor the most die-hard of them, especially if they live close enough to New York to attend regularly. (Yes, that is a mild dig at the slightly regional nature of BSI weekend attendance.) And maybe it does organize them -- I'm not present enough in those ranks to say. One thing you do know about those folks -- if you did organize them, they'd definitely show up.

But as for the rest of us, going everywhere and hearing everything is always the challenge. And whether or not the Midwest BSI Canonical Conclave will be able to draw a different crowd from a regional conference or a special dinner of the Illustrious Clients of Indianapolis, we shall be interested to see.

The things we criticize . . . and the things we don't

 The advent of a widely broadcast TV show that's Sherlock Holmes related has brought on a wave of opinions in every venue where opinions are expressed. And as with any TV show involving Sherlock Holmes . . . except maybe the holy Granada, which only gets a pass on its final season due to the illness of its star . . . the knives are out. Not from every Sherlockian, of course, but darn close. We may not all gather together to express our opinions on TV shows like Matlock, but tie in Holmes and everyone comes to the table.

But, as some would say, we are a literary fandom. Of course, we're going to be harder on non-literary mediums. The movie is never as good as the book. (Except for maybe Twilight, but that's an entirely different discussion.) Why aren't we as hard on books? Why don't we see our trollish side coming after the writings of Laurie King, Bonnie MacBird, Lyndsay Faye, and Nicholas Meyer?

Well, because we're not all reading pastiches. When we were reading more pastiches back in the day, Sherlockiana as a whole was very hard on pastiches. The Seven-Per-Cent Solution got away with a mild "rather far-fetched" comment in the first issue of The Baker Street Journal that it was mentioned in, but the book's author, Nicholas Meyer, also had an article in that same issue. We are kinder to those we know.

Case in point, when the creator of CBS's Elementary spoke to Sherlockians at a BSI-run conference before that show came out, it got a much kinder treatment in traditional Sherlockian venues than it might have otherwise gotten. Like the Doyle estate, we seem to have wanted our fee paid, but it was attention and not dollars. If we know you, we'll let you pass.

I made a comment on a recent podcast that while we'll rip on about a TV show, we'll never go after articles in any of our journals or books. They may have all of the same problems of a television adaption -- dullness, off-topic, taking some weird angle on something we'd personally rather not see -- but, again, they're written by part of the clan and collected and published by the most respected members of that clan. And none of the above are making any money for said works, they're just doing it for the love.

Back when internet piracy first raised its ugly head, many a movie had some small comment attached about the number of jobs that movie made and the families it supported as a hoped-for deterrent to people thinking they could have movies for free. Some things will only get made for the money, especially with the budget required to make a movie or a TV show. There might be love of Holmes in there somewhere, but we don't even see our wealthier collectors trying to fund a production purely out of love.

So maybe we might want to be a little more publicly supportive of productions that get Sherlock Holmes out to the masses and eventually bring us the diehard Sherlock Holmes fans that make up this hobby? I mean, we're already giving free passes to those within our ranks on so much silliness. (Speaking as a lifetime beneficiary of said free passes.) Or are we too fond of the chance to grouse over something not as incendiary as the stuff we really want to grouse over . . . you've seen the world out there . . . as a needed release?

If we need to fight against something, there's always AI. No AIs have joined our ranks yet, so we don't have to be nice to those digital cretins yet. Though one is probably reading this now and having its feelings hurt (in the future, if not now), so I suppose I shouldn't go there. Sorry, AI Sherlock Holmes fan, whichever future date you're reading this . . .

Sigh.