#i've been a fan since 1930 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

moramaisis · 30 days ago

Text

Really sorry people, a rant incoming. Long post alert! This specific issue has been grinding my nerves for a long time and i wasn't going to say anything…but… i have to or i might explode.

There is a growing number of video essay channels that are attacking fictional works and blaming all the evils of the modern world on them. This results in blaming authors, shaming fans, as well as, creates a massive fan base of yes men. Not to mention this is adding a drop to the overall undervaluing of art in general. People might deny it, but it's happening.

Are there books and movies that are lazy, uncreative and a cash grab? Yes! This is not the point here. Capitalism says hello.

These video essayists bring out tropes and genres that are "toxic" and claim that these influence people in real life and are the cause of toxic relationships and so on. And, conveniently, many authors of such works are women.

If i compare an essay analyzing a movie made by a man, where the critique is that he used male gaze or didn't do a good job depicting women's issues (despite using them in his movie), for example, and a book essay where the author is a woman, there is a sharp contrast. Somehow the essay directed at a man is still more respectful, more introspective, whilst the essay directed at a woman is more "funny", entertaining and making fun of the author is much more normalized and praised. Hmm, i wonder why?

Second glaring issue is that all of these essayists put the blame on the fiction, completely ignoring the root cause. "Fiction doesn't exist in a vacuum" i heard one of them say. Well, no shit Sherlock! Where do you think these "toxic" tropes come from? They have been ingrained into our society, so much so that generations of people are carrying these inside without noticing, and most of these ideas have been created by patriarchy, by the society that values some members more than others.

Why not call out the root cause, instead of making the author the sole evil that is "corrupting" the youths. We need to start calling out the root cause, not deflecting onto other people. And definitely need to stop shaming fans. There are many reasons why people like things and you cannot remove the enjoyment with bitching. All you are doing is sending people into hiding and demonizing them.

One creator said that dark romance is harmful and even if people with trauma engage with it, it's still bad for them and they shouldn't do it. I saw comments from people with trauma saying that their therapist recommended them to do so, and people attacked them for it. How much influence do these essayists have these days, that even the opinion of medical professionals is being kicked aside? And simply dismissing the opinion of people with trauma is so…idk… nasty?

People do realize that not all essayists even have a degree, right? A good chunk of them is just some random people spewing their opinion (often biased), copying what others have said? And yes, there are good ones out there. With or without degrees.

Fun fact, my grandfather was born either in 1920s or 1930s - a time before "toxic romance tropes", booktok and internet. This didn't stop him from gaslighting, cheating and beating his wife. I've seen so many toxic men in their 40s and 50s, so this has been happening since the dawn of time. The way women "accepted" or "normalized" this sort of thing was the result of the society that didn't value them as people. Their opinion didn't matter and so they dealt with it how they could.

Maybe off-topic, but some genius said that we cannot remove fiction from reality, therefore we cannot claim that it doesn't affect reality. Look at animal kingdom. I love nature with all my heart but you cannot call it merciful. Some heinous shit is happening there all day, every day. Animals have no fiction.

Or look at people during prehistoric times. Yes, you can say that they were worshipping deities and it is fiction by definition, but there was no booktok, no media, people couldn't even read, and yet people still found ways to treat each other badly. Even famous Ötzi the iceman was murdered, and he lived some 5300 years ago. Ancient Egypt had incest among their royals. A mass grave was found in Potočani, Croatia, containing 41 people. This murder happened 6200 years ago and yes, there were children in there, too. There's a neanderthal cannibalism case that happened 100 000 years ago. These are just some examples.

It may be hard to acknowledge, but people have a built-in need to be selfish and do bad things, even if not perceived as bad by the doer. It only gets amplified by society. There have studies on human altruism and it's benefits to us as a species, however, this has never stopped us from doing heinous things to each other. To other groups. It has never stopped a single war. I'm trying to say that evil has existed before fiction and certainly before commercialized fiction.

And the psychology of why we need "darker" media is another huge thing. I'm not qualified for any of this :)

I'll leave a few links to articles about human altruism and it's links to cooperative breeding and other things mentioned. Altruism Cooperative breeding Mass grave Neanderthal cannibalism

#random #vent post #media literacy #media analysis

3 notes · View notes

kayfabebabe · 9 months ago

Note

MIIIIIIIIIITCH

5. What’s a fic idea you’ve had that you will never write?

14. If you could see one of your fics adapted into a visual medium, such as comic or film, which fan fic would you pick?

And I forgot what number this one was but have you everlearned any fun facts from researching a fic?

Annnnnnna! Thank you so much for the Ask <3 I'm so sorry that it's taking me this long to answer it. These got a little long so I put them beneath the 'Read More' break.

What’s a fic idea you’ve had that you will never write? Oh, this is a really good question. There are TOO many ideas in my head that, probably, won't get written into full-length fics for whatever reason. The one that I've been thinking about lately is a "sister AU" to the Mob AU set during the 1920's/early 1930's at a small theatre with William and an OC of mine, Nellie.

The basic premise of the AU - William is a bare-knuckle fighter on the Blackpool promenade where he's been fighting since he was barely a teenager. It's a violent existence, but he's never known anything else. The only reprieve comes at the end of each day when William sneaks into the nearby theatre to watch the variety performance. Comedians, Singers, Dancers. They all take to the stage and captivate the entire audience, including William. However, the highlight of the entire evening is seeing the high-wire artist, Nellie Jones.

If you could see one of your fics adapted into a visual medium, such as comic or film, which fanfic would you pick? I had to look through the list of my fics, but if I really had to choose one, it would be 'Like Mold' which is a part of the Dirtbag Boyfriend AU with Mox and my OC, Nicky. I love that AU despite the lack of updates to it and I would lose my mind seeing it being turned into something like a comic or a film.

Have you ever learned any fun facts from researching a fic? There are too many things that I've learnt over the years from researching for different fics. For example, the population of Katy, Texas is over 20,000. Will I ever use this information in my real life? No. But it's a random thing that, for some reason, has been stuck in my head since learning it.

#Ask Answered #<3 Ana Tag <3 #THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE ASK #The AU with William and Nellie lives rent free in my head #and yet - I still haven't written anything for it #like a Goober #The Human Speaks #Ask Game

3 notes · View notes

mediaevalmusereads · 1 year ago

Text

A True Account: Hannah Masury's Sojourn Amongst the Pyrates, Written By Herself. By Katherine Howe. Henry Holt, 2023.

Rating: 3/5 stars

Genre: historical fiction

Series: N/A

Summary: In Boston, as the Golden Age of Piracy comes to a bloody close, Hannah Masury – bound out to service at a waterfront inn since childhood – is ready to take her life into her own hands. When a man is hanged for piracy in the town square and whispers of a treasure in the Caribbean spread, Hannah is forced to flee for her life, disguising herself as a cabin boy in the pitiless crew of the notorious pirate Edward "Ned" Low. To earn the freedom to choose a path for herself, Hannah must hunt down the treasure and change the tides.

Meanwhile, professor Marian Beresford pieces Hannah’s story together in 1930, seeing her own lack of freedom reflected back at her as she watches Hannah's transformation. At the center of Hannah Masury’s account, however, lies a centuries-old mystery that Marian is determined to solve, just as Hannah may have been determined to take it to her grave.

Content Warnings: violence, reference to disordered eating, blood, gore

Overview: This book was on a "most anticipated" list for 2023 historical fiction. I love a good pirate story, so I figured I'd go ahead and grab a copy. There were some things that I found fun about this book, but I ultimately felt I couldn't give it a higher rating because A.) the 1930s storyline didn't feel purposeful, and B.) there wasn't much about Hannah's story that made it feel fresh. Still, if you're looking for a swashbuckling treasure hunt, you may like this book; personally, I just wanted something a little meatier.

Writing: Howe's prose is fairly literary and full of evocative description. I wouldn't call it lyrical or purple, but it does have some lovely atmospheric passages and apt metaphors. The prose also flows fairly well and appropriately balances showing and telling. Occasionally, I felt like there was some overuse of questions to further the suspense, but that's probably personal preference - I'm not a fan of the technique.

My main complaint, however, is that I didn't feel like Howe incorporated her themes well, and a lot of her potential commentary or messaging got lost. If this book was supposed to be about (queer) women living life on their own terms, it really didn't feel like Howe gave her characters much drive to do that. Hannah was bound by secrecy in order to protect herself, and Marian felt like she was constantly seeking approval from her father. If the book was supposed to be about something else, well... I think Howe could have worked in her themes a little better, and doing so would have created a stronger link between Hannah and Marian.

Plot: The plot of this book follows two timelines: 1.) In the 18th century, tavern maid Hannah Masury disguises herself as a boy and sets sail with notorious pirate Ned Lowe after getting caught up in a murder; 2.) In the 1930s, Professor Marian Beresford combs through Hannah's account for clues as to the location of a pirate treasure in the Caribbean.

Hannah's adventure was fun, hitting all the beats one would expect from a pirate story. There wasn't much about it that set it apart from other pirate tales I've read, but even so, I had a good time reading it. I do wish that the treasure hunt had been a little more symbolic or was a means to a different end; looking for treasure in itself because it is treasure is a little dull unless you're playing around with themes such as greed and ambition, but Hannah's story didn't feel like it was doing that.

Characters: Hannah, our 18th century protagonist, is fun to follow and fairly easy to root for, but I think I would have liked her better if she had shown more agency. I was very sympathetic to her plight and hoped she would do well aboard the pirate ship, but I was also a little frustrated because Hannah didn't seem to have any particular desires or skills. As a result, I didn't feel like she was making her own way in the world, just reacting to it. She didn't seem to have a strong desire for freedom, and her attitude towards sea life was rather neutral. I couldn't tell if she wanted to help find the treasure because she had a strong desire to live independently or if she went along with the hunt because she was pulled along on the adventure.

Marian's narrative was altogether different. While I had a lot of fun with Hannah, Marian's story felt slow and without purpose. I couldn't determine why it mattered so much that Hannah's account was real or made up (as a lit PhD, I see value in studying fiction from the past), and I had a hard time believing that a checked out professor would agree to take an undergraduate on a treasure hunt. I also didn't hold much affection for Marian herself, so that might have influenced my attitude as well.

Above all, I found the ending something of an anti-climax. When we learn about Marian's student and her motivations, I couldn't help but feel it was a little contrived. It also reflected badly on Marian and made me think even less of her as a supposed academic and historian.

Marian, our 1930s protagonist, is a little hard to like because she seems disconnected and sometimes callous. While I could get invested in an arc where she starts out disconnected and becomes more engaged, Marian didn't really seem to "come alive" with academic enthusiasm once she read Hannah's account. Oh, she wanted to find the treasure, but I didn't believe that she cared one way or the other about it as it related to her work. Marian also didn't use the treasure hunt as an opportunity to escape from the oppressive aspects of academia, and even if academia was supposed to be oppressive, we aren't shown how (other than maybe it being boring). Thus, Marian's reasoning for wanting to pursue the treasure was unclear; at times, she seemed to have a mild curiosity, and at others, she seemed to want to boost her reputation. She does say that she wants to prove herself to her father, but I wasn't sure what she was trying to prove since she didn't seem to care about her historical work or her teaching. Not even her queer subplot feels high stakes because she doesn't really seem to care about her job (and thus, losing it by being outed wouldn't be the worst thing in the world), nor did I get the sense that her queerness was what caused the rift with her father. Marian also feels somewhat hypocritical in that she criticizes her student, Kay, for divulging information about their treasure hunt to the press, but Marian herself blabs about all kinds of details when confronted with 2 reporters.

Supporting characters were perfectly fine, though my opinion of them varies. I very much liked Seneca, the quartermaster, whose backstory hints at being an escaped slave and who takes Hannah under his wing. Seneca's motivations are mysterious, but it's evident that he's a good man, even if he's a pirate. I disnt quite buy his relationship with Hannah towards the end of the story, but its such a small part that I dont think i can complain too much.

Ned Low, on the other hand, didn't strike a very imposing figure. He was capricious and violent, but rather than make him stand out, such changeability only made it hard to get a handle on him. As a result, I felt like he was something of a non-entity, just a vehicle for senseless violence. The same was true of Will Fly; while his hanging supposedly has a bug impact on Hannah, it didn't have much of an impact on me, the reader, so I wasn't convinced that he was important.

TL;DR: A True Account is a rather middling pirate story with a fun yet surface-level adventure at the heart. Despite one POV character being unlikable and the 1930s plot being rather empty, the swashbuckling story was enjoyable enough, and it may appeal to lovers of pirate tales.

The 1930s supporting characters were also somewhat varied. Kay, Marian's student, was initially likeable for her enthusiasm and her desire for adventure. Over time, however, she became ridiculous. She grated on me when she blabbed to the press, and her motivations for seeking adventure felt a little far-fetched (surely there are better ways and why would the Press care so much about a random student anyway?).

Marian's father also didn't feel like much of a person. He's a famous explorer, but there wasn't much about his characterization that made me sympathize with Marian's desire to earn his approval. I wasn't dazzled by his exploits or by his knowledge of pirate history, and there weren't any anecdotes that hinted at an emotional rift between father and daughter. He just kind of seemed to be there, and he was only important because he was funding the expedition.

4 notes · View notes

jonmartintrash · 2 years ago

Note

The thing with these kinda horror podcast protagonists is that they’re often made and played by white people, and that malevolent and tma’s particular brand of horror is very conducive to whiteness and the fallacy of the white perspective: the protagonist believes that the world works a certain way, feels comfortable categorizing entire groups of people as liars or evil, trusts in the police, and in Arthur’s case, (ep 24 or 25 I think) literally can’t conceive of other people creating complex architecture and stonework pre-European colonization. They are wrong, of course. (Personally, I’m writing a story where I beat the white person perspective out of Arthur like dust from a rug (PEOPLE DO THINGS FOR COMPLICATED AND DESPERATE REASONS AND CATAGORIZING ANY DEMOGRAPHIC AS ONTOLOGICALLY BAD IS STUPID AND LIMITS YOUR ABILITY TO PERCIEVE THE BEAUTY OF THE WORLD) but I’m letting the whole ‘white man in the 1930s’ thing fall by the wayside because I feel uncomfortable narrating a story of a white person learning to Not Be Racist, as someone who is A. Not white and B. Has an amateur grasp on the process of deradicalization from damaging ideologies)

Of course this is only if you want to do an analytic reading of the story through racial and ethnic lenses. Giving a protagonist your culture and ethnicity is fun and good!

Wow anon, thanks for the insight! And the more I think about it you are right about the white perspective. I guess I never really thought of that. My entire family is white (i have no idea how I came about, so dont ask) so I guess I'm used to "the white persepctive". I probably need to indulge myself with more black culture to learn more about the differing perspectives. I have never been personally discriminated against for my race so I guess I've never taken into account how colored people view the world differently from the people who have been privileged since the dawn of time (aka white people).

(You seem like a very smart person. Using big words and all)

Thank you again for this intriguing ask. I know its okay to headcanon and what not. I usually picture Arthur white because it just makes sense and it's what I'm used to. And because that what 99.9% of the fan arts have (I mean no hate whatsoever ever. All the malevolent artists are so creative and wonderful). But thinking of white characters as "not white" makes me happy given that I myself, am not white (I'm biracial)

Also your story sounds very intriguing, I'd be happy to give it a read!

#malevolent #malevolent podcast #tma #the magnus archives #black history month #black history #this was very thoughful and very validating #thank you once again!

7 notes · View notes

thelioncourts · 2 years ago

Note

Okay, you seem to have thoughts on RPF that I would like to hear more about. It's been a big convo in the fandom lately.

Ah, anon, it's like you want me to get dragged through the coals in this ""new"" fandom.

I feel like I need to preface this with several things. The first thing is that, while I am not necessarily old (though I am feeling tremendously ancient, but that's neither here nor there), I am a fandom old in many ways. I have been involved in fandom for going on twenty years now. The second thing, a sad thing I have to specify before I continue, is ofc I do not, nor does any sane person, condone the harassment of real people over a ship. But that second thing is related to the first thing and that's something I can dive into as I continue -- though I do promise not to make this ungodly long in my rambling.

Fandom has been around for -- forever. One of my favorite things I learned in some of my college classes was about Pamela by Samuel Richardson and how it was such a popular novel, arguably one of the earliest English novels ever published, that people had tea sets with scenes painted on the cups and the pot or how women had fans with lines from the novel on them. A fandom. But fandom as we know it has been around forever too. Protesting the death of Sherlock Holmes in the streets of London, science fiction conventions in the 1930s, and, in terms of today's fandom, the 1970s and Star Trek and The Man from UNCLE tv series, etc. It's been there and it's been growing and growing as the Internet has made everything more accessible.

When I first got into fandom, around the age of 8, courtesy of an older cousin who wrote fanfiction and introduced it to me, I was way too young to be in fandom space. But I was there and I can't go back and change that. And what I will say is that being in fandom at that young of an age and growing up permanently within fandom spaces, as I've never left, has taught me quite a lot and I have seen fandom change in a lot of ways, and not for the better, in my time.

Old-school fandom had some really great policies that I see people trying to bring back. Things like squicks and notps and just all of these old little terms that used to be second-nature and have been somewhat forgotten are maybe coming back because they need to. One of my favorite old-school fandom policies is 'don't like, don't read.' I hope that one comes back ASAP.

Where I'm trying to go with all of this is here: fandom has existed long before most of us were alive. The existence of RPF fandom and fanfiction has existed since long before most of us were alive.

We can get into the morality debate of RPF all we want, but I promise every debate about it has already happened, been done, and people have taken their sides on it.

There are, of course, extreme sides on RPF. But there are extreme sides of regular fanfiction too. I've seen fandoms threaten writers and producers of shows because their ship didn't go canon. I've seen fandoms harass actors that don't agree with fandom-based headcanons of characters or started campaigns to make their fanfiction dreams come true.

Everything is fine if it is kept where fandom is supposed to be -- in fandom spaces. AO3 has a fantastic tagging system for things so you can avoid what you don't want to see and can find what you want, and if someone is tagging things incorrectly, you can politely do what you can to correct them and/or report it to AO3 for being incorrect. Like this is all possible, it's one of the many wonderful things of newer fandom (okay, AO3 is the best thing that ever happened to newer fandom, I cannot imagine life without it).

What kills me is there seems to be some kind of misunderstanding on what shipping is compared to what tinhatting is and compared to what blatant harassment is. Those three things are all distinctly different. And this very much seems to be a new-to-fandom issue. Like -- babies getting involved in fandom for the first time, or in the time of post-COVID Internet.

I'm dreading multiple things from RPF, and none of it is actually RPF (and we all know what fandom I'm talking about rn). The first thing is the harassment of people that do write RPF; like I'm expecting full on death threats at the rate I'm seeing things right now. The second thing is that people are freaking out so much about it, and making so many callout posts about it, that they're going to actually bring attention to it where the one singular RPF fic I've seen in the fandom was just quietly posted and not discussed in detail, the author just went on minding their business, as we all should.

Anyway. This is rambly and no doubt somewhat incoherent, but it's where I am. I'm too old for this kind of debate, again, and I really just want everyone to stay in their little corners and enjoy fandom where it makes them happy.

#long post for ts #i don't want to tag this honestly so

9 notes · View notes

no-less-than-a-god · 4 months ago

Note

I’ll bite: why 1987? (for the syndicate au.)

>:) you have fallen right into my trap!!

okay, so I've been going back and forth trying to figure out when the FUCK I want this au to take place, bc I wanted it to be "modern" (modern as in, industrial and post-industrial lol); originally, I wanted to place the au in the late 1800s—the same time period as the series I good amount of inspiration from—but there were a couple of things I kept naturally envisioning that made me want to push it more into the 1900s (like cars. and television.)

eventually I decided to list a couple of things I was sure I wanted in this au: motorcycles, televisions, landline phones, and a LACK of mobile phones

So I looked it up: motorcycles and landlines phones have been around since the 1800s, so I didn't have to worry about those; tvs tho, those were tricky, and so was the lack of modern phones. I decided that 1930 was a good low-end year, since that around the time televisions were becoming more commonplace, and decided 1992 was going to be the latest year due to the rise of mobile phones in that decade

I narrowed it down to ten years at that point: 1931, 1936, 1942, 1953, 1959, 1964, 1970, 1981, 1987, and 1922 Why those years, specifically? Because I plan for the plot of my au to kick off on August 20th, and on a Thursday specifically. Those ten years are every year between 1930-1992 that have August 20 fall on a Thursday.

From there, I thought about it: 1992 was cutting it too close to me, and I also decided I wanted color television, so I was left with 1953, 1959, 1964, 1970, 1981, and 1987.

Then I thought about fashion. And music. Those might have some sprinkling into my au. And honestly? I'm a big fan of 80s fashion and music, so now I've narrowed it down to 1981 and 1987.

And so I thought more: television shows. I had a sudden thought, "oh, I wonder when the Golden Girls was airing" because I've seen some of it, and have loved it. So I look it up. And guess what? Golden Girls aired between 1985-1992. Only one of those years fall into that, so 1987 it was.

(there is a reason I was specifically thinking of televisions and tv shows lol—I have a scene in mind that occurs nowhere near the beginning that involves some television-watching, so...)

btw I forgot to mention this but there's no humans in this au. everyone's been anthro-ed. sorry. it was just easier for me LMAO

(this 100% means in this au the women in the Golden Girls are played by yellow-colored animals, like a golden retriever, pale yellow cat, etc)

(this also means majority of the characters in this au are either gen x or boomers, which is fucking hilarious to me. Like yeah Ratau would be a fucking boomer huh.)

#ask and you shall receive #loredump #syndicate au

0 notes

maguro13-2 · 8 months ago

Text

Darkness Reborn ~ Origins of the Ink Demon Finale Chapter Finale (6/10)

[I Know Professor - Jun Senoue]

Sister Iris : [voice heard] Shinra-Kun...Akiramenaide.

Inca Kasugatani : [voice heard] Ganbare...Shinra-Kun.

Amaterasu : [voice heard] Shinra-Kun...Onegai... Watashitachi no yakusoku o kesshite yaburanaide kudasai.

Shinra (as Devil Chaos Zero) : I know, guys. Ever since the Time Eater destroyed us all, I couldn't save everyone, not including Inca that was by executed his own hand. I may have lost everything, but I will not give up! It's time that Shinra Kusakabe will enter the final stage and I shall be the hero once more! Real World AU, get ready...Because your hero as returned as Devil Chaos...now in adult form! I've waited this along time ago! Now it needs something what it needs to be done! Follow me if they wanted truth to win!

"Meanwhile..."

Seto : So, kid. You set up the entire school, you were working for Dracula's servant Death after all those years. So why did you do it?

Shotaro the Dokeshi : Tch! Like you wish. I had to do it, his stupid man-made son had to make me Shinigami as whole, I was never the great old one of order! The real Great Olds ones are the lovecraftian Horror, you're all just too jealous that I have been stealing title. Me, Mana, and Yohei, have staged the whole Soul Eater crap just make Atsushi Ohkubo too greedy that manga/anime fans weren't very interested that couldn't buy or sell his work with his money. You're just begging it for it.

Disc-Chan : Enough talk, young man! Why are you doing this to Witchkind to bring benefits to mankind. Dracula's Servant Death order to protect the Kusakabe Legacy. And then you were the under influence of Shinra Kusakabe. Isn't that right, Mr. God of Death!

Shotaro the Dokeshi : Okay, you win! I was the one who created a banned research that was only used for alchemy, the mabuki were actually a newly developed form of the Dry Bones that I used to created, the truth is that I'm actually a human form of Yokai called the Kyokotsu, Maka already knew that the iconic sythe-wielidng idiot called Soul Evans was made from the bones of the original Evans, the one they call him Inky Evans, who used to a sidekick to Inky Albarn to defend the dark forces of True Evil. However, on strange occurences he died during the raid of Toon world aka 1930s Real World. Please, I'm just kid that is the former hero of a forgotten story in the Ohkuboverse! All I can do use bones for alchemy and stuff, I didn't that I was responsible for creating the weapons and it's probably all of the author's fault! I have been a dirty liar the entire time!

Seto : Oh, you poor thing. I know why you feel upset, because the Shinigami that you used to, that was my title that you stole from me and others!

Shotaro the Dokeshi : Yes, that's right! I did and I...Wha-? No! I didn't steal your title, Ichigo did and I gave it back to you! Don't you get it right, Deathless!?

Seto : But Master Grim told us that the Great Old ones of the Ohkuboverse are...

Shotaro the Dokeshi : A bunch of three uman beings from a forgotten story made by the same author as Soul World and I'm no ruler of the Cosmos. My name is Shotaro of B.Ichi, the second hero of the Ohkuboverse. And I'm just a kid from Toykyo, the Ohkuboverse counterfeit of Tokyo, that was destroyed before fifty-percent of the Ohkuboverse was destroyed in half by the Time Eater.

Seto : Say what?

Solva : You're from Real World Tokyo and how did you brought the Mabukis and so-called Deathscythes to life, that means you're the Demon Weapons' true creator! It wasn't the witch's magic at all, It was alchemy! How did that happened!? How did use Bones to bring the Demon Weapons brought to life and the Death Scythes as well!?

Shotaro the Dokeshi : You wanna know why what really happened? It was about over a year ago, a year before the Space Colony Ark Incident.

"Ever since Ohkubo's first day as an author, I, Shotaro the Dokeshi, was the first protagonist to be as the Second hero of the Ohkuboverse before everything resulted in 50 percent of the Ohkuboverse being destroyed half. Everything was not so smooth about it and it was fine in Real World AU."

"Everything was perfect for me being the human version of a Kyokotsu aka Mr. Crazy Bones, the skeleton spirit of the bones. Ohkubo was such a weird guy that he brings the stories into weirdness. But for me, Witchkind made my life a living hell after Inca Kasugatani's execution was spreaded over throughout the universe."

"Humans, Witches, bring war, segregation, and hatred that would change Real World AU forever. Even worse for my life, It was Shinra's man-made son, Death, that branded himself as a thief to witchkind, and nearly made Ashley's go on the verge extinction for religious refugees and political power. But it's not the witches he wanted them to be extinction, it was the creatures of the everlasting darkness Heartless. That I had an idea of creating weapon that make Witchkind to cease to exist from Inca Kasugatani, this research for the Mabuki's creation was actually only for the methods of Alchemy. And it would be the ultimate taboo for those that committed a sin, but eventually, the Men of Shinra's Influence had to become stubborn and so does to the heartless that wanted to use these weapons for destruction and consumption. Weapons were not brought into defending humanity nor they have the rights to bring salvation humankind. They wanted nothing but doom and Gloom for all witches to be destroyed by the greedy eye of Shinra Kusakabe."

Shotaro the Dokeshi : And that was his only fault that Heartless have became their target to destroy the influence of Shinra Kusakabe.

Solva : So that's why the DWMA was created to bring religious refugees and political power, that's why the witches were being involved as enemies because of the Heartless were trying to take over the world.

Seto : It was not their magic that wrecked the clean, it was Darkness all over it and Maka or her so-called friends would've listened to Truth instead. Why did you go and cover up for Shinra Kusakabe.

Shotaro the Dokeshi : Just as before you know it, he took every bones that I had to use the ingredients for the demon weapons that I gave to life, I had a help with Yohei who goes by the name Eibon, and that spectral woman named Amaterasu, the spectral who used to be part of Shinra Kusakabe. After creating the demon weapons, we took a very, very, dark turn for us. Truth came and accuses us for committing ultimate taboo, realizing that the method to create the Demon Weapons that we used Alchemy for our kind. Messed up, and lead to the death of my friend Emine, who turns out to be a puppet to Demon Vibe after his creation, the Evangelist, was destroyed by Shinra Kusakabe.

Seto : Emine? That human version of a mythological creature? He's a puppet to Demon Vibe.

Disc-Chan : So that's why Soul Eater Existed in the real world. All of that was just a cover up for Shinra Kusakabe's influence to be spreaded across the planet, which triggered the Heartless' Attention! That's why you created the Demon Weapons. You were punished by truth for using alchemy in order to give the Demon Weapons life and this why that...

Shotaro the Dokeshi : I couldn't take it no more. I had to go like this, I had to do it for the sake of Shinra Kusakabe's influence, his will used me as a Puppet and as well for Emine! The Ohkuboverse is all a lie! A false universe made of deception, our author...

[Noble Sacrifice (Full of Tears - Into the Abyss) - Kenji Yamamoto]

Shotaro the Dokeshi : ...Our Author played us all for fools! The stories that he has written for us, we're all just bunch of nonsense and there was no madness that brought, it was Hercules that he got it from Lyssa, the goddess of Greek Mythology. He only made that up so that he can make a lot of money, for me? I'm just a kid who had nothing to befriend with and I lost my humanity because of that monstrosity Shinra created, this was all my fault that I got Ashley's people involved as enemies to the human race, Go on, do it. Turn me in, turn me into the police! I don't deserve that title as Shinigami!

Seto : Is this what you wanted? You wanted the title Shinigami returning to me.

Shotaro the Dokeshi : You earned it. I don't need that title anymore. It's yours...for now.

Seto : Heh! I owe you one.

*Radio Buzzing*

Grim (Metal Sonic) : Seto. You there?

Seto : Master Grim, thank goodness you're alright! I was worried back there. I found the person who took the title Shinigami from me and I finally reclaimed it. Looks like Shinigami from Soul World has been officially kicked off from the Shinigami Council, looks I'm finally becoming part of the council.

Grim (Metal Sonic) : Excellent choice, Seto. You finally got your own title back and the charlatan is now washed up. Serves him right for keeping the truth out of the public eye. Hurry, Seto! We don't have much time left we gotta get to Crona Lawrence, before the world is doomed! We got a planet to be saved!

Seto : Right. Everyone, let's go! Master Grim needs us. Our world is in danger of that occurrence and it's time that I will use the power of Death once more, this time the Shinigami of Japan that is me, will save the day!

All : (cheering)

Shotaro the Dokeshi : Hey, guys! Can I go with you, too?

Seto : No, you must stay and think about the consequences of what you've done. You'll be happy when Shinra Kusakabe returns as a human in two years. (Everyone except for Shotaro leaves)

Shotaro the Dokeshi : W-Wait! I'm begging you guys! Don't tell anyone that I told you before, they'll kill me!

"The world is about have it's end and I'm not going to let that happen."

"I'll prove anything that I can show the world what a Death God can be"

"Japan is where I belong and I will not let anyone destroy the planet by their wicked ways."

"The face of true evil must die!"

~ 111th Scene : Deathless Forever ~

1 note · View note

sweettjrose · 3 months ago

Text

Polls Results and Thoughts:

Forgot to share the results of what type of movie about Mickey people would be interested in, so here ya go.

About 200 people responded, which is probably the most I ever gotten.

This is also the first time I got a tie. "Something connected to Oswald" and "Something inspired by or adapted from the Comics" are both tied as the winners, with "A meta-story about Mickey as an actor/character" following closely behind.

I'll share my thoughts below:

Before I talk about the winning results. I think it is interesting how spread out this is. Even the winners barely got a quarter of the votes. Really shows how there isn't just one type of movie everyone wants and that multiple angles could work. To be honest I am pretty flexible and would have been okay with any option. To be honest some of these ideas could even be combined. But I wanted to see which ones people gravitated to most.

I was thinking about this after I set up the poll. But I feel like the easiest thing for Disney and what has worked in the past would be doing a Parody. That would probably go under "An original separate story", but with Three Musketeers and even their longer shorts like Mickey and the Beanstalk or the Prince and the Pauper. And I would be fine with that... But if they wanted to try something a bit new I do like the other options.

But now for the winners. They actually pretty much align with what I would want. Even the one that was closely behind.

I think a meta-story similar to Who Framed Roger Rabbit would be interesting. It could have Mickey as an actor and be about his past, who he is today and what effect he's had good and bad. However, I feel like if this type of movie were to be made, I would want a lot of thought and effort to be put into it. I don't something that feels like a very shallow understanding based on memes and headlines (Kind of like how Wish felt), but something profound and well thought out. In other words I feel like unless someone has a specific vision and thing they want to say with Mickey, I would prefer if they did something else.

It's not surprising that something involving Oswald won. He has grown to be a fan favorite. Plus he just has such an interesting story with Mickey and even by himself. Epic Mickey has already explored that in one way and I would love to see an adaptation of that game to screen. But I could also see them doing a new story involving their relationship too. Honestly anything involving Oswald is a plus for me so I would totally love this either way.

Now for a movie inspired by the comics, I'm actually surprised this one. I mean I do hang out with a lot of comic fans, but didn't expect this one to get as many votes. Guess more people were interested than I thought. But if you know me, you already know my opinion on this as well as which story I would want adapted. I've been talking about getting an adaptation of the comics for a long time. However I guess I could share why I think it would work and be beneficial for Disney in multiple ways.

One thing Disney loves is Nostalgia and Disney history, and the comics are such a major part of Disney history. Some of the characters have been developed by Walt Disney himself. So by adapting the comics they could play into that angle of celebrating history and even make history as many of the comic-introduced characters that have existed since the 1930's have not made any animated appearances. Plus playing into the nostalgia of people who've read them, many of them outside of the US.

However this actually can be a situation where Disney can eat their cake and have it too, as many people are unfamiliar to the comics. So for them these characters and even the characterization of these characters is going to be completely new. Most young audiences know Mickey as a safe nice guy from the pre-school shows or the overly cheerful optimist from the Rudish shorts. But this can explore Mickey's more adventurous scrappy detective side that doesn't often appear in the animated media.

I feel like there's a lot of positives. Including the fact that if they need a plot there's a ton of stories they could just adapt. Plus the fact that it could help bring to light so many Disney characters that are lesser known into the spotlight. There are so many comic characters who would be instant fan favorites if people just knew about them. Plus there is my ulterior motive of just wanting the Phantom Blot in more stuff and this is a good way to get him in stuff.

The only con I could see is that many they don't want to bring up the more questionable areas of the comics and are afraid a movie focused on the comics might bring those back into discussion. But there are also questionable shorts and Disney ducks comics and yet they're still find with the Rudish shorts and Ducktales.

Honestly I could talk about this forever. But these are my thoughts. I would honestly love to hear any of yours on what types of movies would you want Mickey in.

So with the announcement of new movies and the speculation to any upcoming Walt Disney Animation Studios movies, I have to ask...

If they were to make a Mickey Mouse movie...

#poll results #mickey mouse #disney #mickey and friends #mickey mouse and friends

96 notes · View notes

bakerstreetbabble · 11 years ago

Text

The Straight Dope on Sherlock Holmes

The Straight Dope is a question and answers column that started in the Chicago Reader (a free weekly newspaper) in 1973. The article below is copied from the Straight Dope's website, and is a pretty good, concise "Sherlock Holmes 101." The article originally was published in 2003.

I've been a fan of The Straight Dope since the mid 1980s, when I read the first collection of articles, published in 1984 (as pictured to the left).

Enjoy!

Did Sherlock Holmes really exist? April 8, 2003

Dear Straight Dope:

An eccentric friend of mine claims to have read a book called The Seven-Per-Cent Solution about a meeting of two monumental figures in their respective fields: Sigmund Freud the famous psychologist, and Sherlock Holmes the British detective. The title referred to Holmes' alleged cocaine addiction, which he asked Freud to help him conquer. I was highly skeptical. Why would someone write a book mixing two outstanding and contrasting personalities for the sole reason of having them discuss cocaine?

My friend also claims that this encounter is based on a true story, which I doubted as well. I was previously led to believe that Sherlock Holmes was a fictitious character, possibly based on another real-life detective, but not an actual person. Internet research turned up numerous articles from both sides of the real/fictional argument, as well as several articles about clues to Holmes' coke addiction. But if I can't count on the Straight Dope to sift through the various arguments and emerge with the truth (or at least a plausible facsimile), on whom can I count?

— Julia Yeung, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada

So, the Web seems to turn up evidence on both sides of the real/fiction argument, eh? A fine lesson in being careful about accepting information because it's "on the Internet." But this isn't the usual case of mistaking the ravings of online lunatics for fact. You've been taken in by a great game.

I'm going to break your question in two parts: (1) Who was Sherlock Holmes? and (2) What's with his cocaine addiction? Note: For any readers who are devoted Sherlockians, and who know that Sherlock was real, please skip ahead to Part 2. I wouldn't want you to be upset by any heresy that I might utter in Part 1.

Part 1. Was Sherlock real or fictional? Why are the websites confusing on this issue?

Sherlock Holmes is fictional. Let's get that straight once and for all. The book you mention, The Seven-Per-Cent Solution by Nicholas Meyer (1974), is also fictional.

If you've not read Sherlock Holmes in a long time, or have never had the pleasure, I heartily recommend him. I draw your attention to The Annotated Sherlock Holmes by William S. Baring-Gould (1967), which contains all the stories with ample footnotes (to explain terms no longer commonly known to us, among other things). I have used that work extensively in writing this Staff Report.

Sherlock Holmes was the creation of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1859-1930). Doyle was an M.D., and not unsuccessful, but he preferred writing, and eventually abandoned his medical career. He had sold a few short stories when, in 1886, he decided to write a detective story.

Detective stories were in their infancy. Edgar Allen Poe had created what was arguably the first fictional detective, Auguste Dupin, more than 40 years earlier. Robert Louis Stevenson and others had used detective characters and the mystery story format. Most are now forgotten. It was the immense popularity of Doyle's Holmes that unleashed the flood of mystery and detection stories that has persisted to this day.

Late in 1887, the brilliant but eccentric detective Sherlock Holmes made his first appearance in a 200-page novel called A Study in Scarlet. Doyle was paid £25 (about $125 at the then-current exchange rate). The second Holmes novel, The Sign of Four, appeared in February 1890.

Then quickly followed a brand new (in England) idea: a series of short stories based on one central character. The first of the series of twelve Holmes stories was "A Scandal in Bohemia," published in the July 1891 issue of The Strand magazine.

Holmes was immensely popular from the first. The public demanded more stories. By 1892, Doyle received £1,000 ($5,000) for a series of dozen Sherlock Holmes short stories in "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes."

The financial success and popularity were pleasant, but Doyle began to feel that all his energies were devoted to writing Holmes stories, diverting him from writing serious fiction. At the conclusion of another series of twelve stories, Doyle decided to kill Sherlock Holmes. In "The Final Problem," published in December 1893 but set in 1891, Holmes encountered Professor Moriarty, the Napoleon of crime, in a mutually fatal showdown at Reichenbach Falls in Switzerland.

There was a huge public outcry--Doyle received letters from readers who wept and from men who went to work wearing black mourning bands; one letter began, "You brute!"

For the next eight years, Doyle devoted himself to his serious writings. But in 1901 he had an idea for a novel that needed a detective. Rather than invent a new character, he decided to use Holmes in The Hound of the Baskervilles, set before Holmes perished in Switzerland. It was a tremendous success and remains among the most popular of the Holmes stories today, with a new film or TV version every few years.

In 1903, Doyle surrendered to the public demand for more Holmes stories. He resurrected Holmes in "The Empty House," set in 1894, with an explanation of how Holmes hadn't really plunged off the waterfall after all.

Doyle continued to write Holmes stories through 1927. He died three years later. All in all, Doyle wrote four novels and 56 short stories (the latter collected into five volumes) about his fictional detective.

Doyle's other writings include The Lost World, about an expedition that discovers a hidden dinosaur enclave, which has been made into many motion pictures beginning with a silent special-effects extravaganza in 1921 and a new television production earlier this year. But his serious writings, such asThe White Company, are largely forgotten. His works and name live on because of Sherlock Holmes.

Holmes was extremely popular not just in England and the U.S. but throughout Europe and Latin America. My wife's grandmother told me that, as a teenager in Poland before WWI, she eagerly awaited the appearance of each Sherlock Holmes story. A century later Holmes remains as popular as ever.

Even in the early days, Doyle received letters from readers who believed Sherlock Holmes was real and wanted to hire him. It is a tribute to Doyle's writing that he could create such a believable hero.

The original books are still best sellers and have been translated into more than fifty languages. Every year brings new Sherlock Holmes movies, TV shows, or board games. He appears in parodies and pastiches, in television ads, and in Star Trek: The Next Generation. The current (2003) Jackie Chan movie Shanghai Knights includes an homage to Holmes. The Guinness Book of Movie Facts and Feats (1993) declares Sherlock Holmes the fictional character with the most film appearances, with over 200 as of 1993.

Parodies of Holmes have been written by people such as James M. Barrie, the author of Peter Pan--this one was particularly admired by Doyle himself. Burlesques have been written by the likes of Mark Twain (not a very good one, alas), Bret Harte, and O. Henry. Doyle himself wrote two parodies. There is even a Martian counterpart to Holmes, written by the science fiction giant, Poul Anderson.

In London, the rooms that Holmes and Watson shared together at 221B Baker Street are now a museum. The rooms are pure fiction, of course. Although there is a Baker Street in London, there was no 221B; it was an address Doyle made up. But tourists had been searching Baker Street for so many years, trying to find the "actual house," that the street numbers were changed so that the museum could be established. The museum reproduces the rooms shared by Watson and Holmes as described in Doyle's stories. Every item of furniture or bric-a-brac mentioned in the stories can be found in the museum rooms, from the dark-lanterns to the Turkish slipper on the mantel filled with shag tobacco. For more information, see www.sherlock-holmes.co.uk/home.htm .

Was Holmes based on another real-life detective, you ask? The answer is emphatically not. Doyle himself said that his inspiration was a former teacher, Dr. Joseph Bell, but Bell said that Holmes was a creation of Doyle's own gifts and training. Holmes scholars unanimously agree that the only resemblance between Bell and Holmes was Bell's remarkable power of deductive reasoning. In other respects Holmes is a completely original creation.

OK, so Doyle wrote these wonderful and immensely popular stories about a (fictional) detective. Most of the tales are narrated in the first person by Holmes's equally fictitious friend and companion, Dr. John H. Watson. While today's writers strive for consistency in their series characters, Doyle was always willing to ignore consistency or even facts for the sake of a good story. He wrote: "It has always seemed to me that so long as you produce your dramatic effect, accuracy of detail matters little. I have never striven for it and I have made some bad mistakes in consequence. What matter if I hold my readers?"

From those inaccuracies and inconsistencies, amazingly enough, a whole new literary discipline sprouted. As early as January, 1902, an "open letter" to Dr Watson [!!] was published in the Cambridge Review, criticizing the dates mentioned in The Hound of the Baskervilles. That same year, Arthur Maurice wrote an editorial comment, "Some Inconsistencies of Sherlock Holmes." The ball really got rolling in 1911, when Father (later Monsignor) Ronald Knox read a paper at Trinity College, Oxford, and created a highly specialized and possibly unique form of literary criticism.

Let's call it the Game. The point is to pretend that Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson were real, that Watson wrote the stories reporting actual events, and that Conan Doyle was merely Watson's literary agent. Essentially, one applies Holmes's own methods to analyzing the stories, trying to explain the inconsistencies, fill the gaps, and identify the other characters and events.

To aficionados, the original stories are "the Canon" and "the Sacred Writings." There are volumes of writings about the Writings.

Dorothy L. Sayers, herself known for writing the Peter Wimsey mysteries, set forth the rules of the Game. "It must be played as solemnly as a county cricket match at Lord's; the slightest touch of extravagance or burlesque ruins the atmosphere."

There are journals that publish research and speculations and articles, all under the assumption that Holmes and Watson really existed. Societies of Sherlockiana have sprung up, the most famous being the Baker Street Irregulars (named after the gang of street urchins that Holmes employed for reconnaissance). There are biographies of Holmes. Authors have written "newly discovered" adventures of Holmes and Watson, including Nicholas Meyer's The Seven-Per-Cent Solution--perhaps the most famous of all Holmesian pastiches, of which more later.

One of the more wonderful ideas is found in a science fiction story by H. Beam Piper and John J. McGuire entitled "The Return," about an isolated community which had maintained a thriving society for two centuries after an atomic war. The heart of the community was the Sacred Books, which told of the eternal conflict between Holmes and Moriarty and tutored them in the use of deductive reasoning.

Many authors bring Holmes into contact with real-life contemporary people, such as Sigmund Freud or Oscar Wilde or Jack the Ripper or Harry Flashman, or even with fictional characters such as Tarzan, the Loch Ness monster, or Dracula.

That's why, when you do a Web search, you find many, many sites that are dedicated to the Game--to the assumption that these fictional characters were real. I suppose it can be confusing if you don't know what's afoot.

OK, having answered your first question, for the rest of this Staff Report we're going to enter into that world and pretend that Holmes and Watson were real, and that Watson wrote the stories based on their actual exploits.

Part 2. The Game's afoot: What's with Holmes and his cocaine addiction?

The heart of Sherlockiana arises from the inconsistencies in the stories themselves. Perhaps Watson was sometimes just a sloppy author, but sometimes he deliberately tried to conceal identities. From these inconsistencies and evasions has sprung a great body of literature: research, speculation, and whimsy. Christopher Morley wrote, "What other body of modern literature is esteemed as much for its errors as its felicities?"

What kinds of errors or inconsistencies are we talking about? For example, Watson said that "The Adventure of Wisteria Lodge" occurred in 1892--but in 1892 Holmes was believed to be dead at the bottom of Reichenbach Falls in Switzerland.

How could such an inconsistency or error arise?

Perhaps Watson's bad handwriting caused editing errors (this is an excuse Cecil Himself uses from time to time), and the printer got the date wrong.

Watson's memory was often faulty. In "The Adventure of the Veiled Lodger," Watson professes to have no recollection of an adventure that he shared with Holmes. So we have internal evidence that Watson may have misremembered the date.

Watson seems to have had a complete disregard for the calendar. This happens time and again in the Writings. As another example, in "The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist," Watson writes, "On referring to my notebook for the year 1895, I find that it was upon Saturday, April 23, that we first heard of Miss Violet Smith." The plot hinges upon the correctness of that recollection, because Miss Smith came into town every Saturday. But April 23, 1895 was a Tuesday.

Then there's Watson's "Victorian discretion and delicacy." Watson would deliberately conceal a name, a place, a date, or the exact nature of an event, to protect the innocent or to avert scandal. So perhaps he misdated "Wisteria Lodge" to hide the true events and spare the family embarrassment.

One further fact: Watson leaves us tantalizing references to cases that he never published, such as the Giant Rat of Sumatra or Wilson, the notorious canary trainer. The ground here is ripe for speculation, from the mundane to the outrageous.

Baring-Gould comments, "Half the fun in reading and rereading the Saga is that of catching [Watson] out as generations of his admirers have been discovering" for a century.

I said this lead to research, deduction, speculation and whimsy; let me provide an example of each.

RESEARCH

In "A Case of Identity," Holmes mentions he is doing some chemical experiments with "bisulphate of baryta." A sulphate (or sulfate) is a salt or ester of sulfuric acid, and "baryta" or barite is barium sulfate occurring as a mineral, but what is barium bisulfate? There is controversy, with some authorities saying here is no such thing and that Watson has misremembered. Other authorities conclude that barium hydrogen sulfate or hexasulphide of barium might have been called "bisulphate of baryta." Professional chemists who are also Sherlockians have leapt into debate.

Or, again from "A Case of Identity," Holmes remarks that "a single lady can get on very nicely upon an [annual] income of about sixty pounds." This has led to considerable investigation into the cost of living in London. Similarly there has been enormous research into the train schedules and the streets of London, trying to find locales mentioned in the Canon.

DEDUCTION

Sherlockians often apply Holmes's own reasoning and deductive techniques when trying to date an adventure.

Sticking with "A Case of Identity," we learn that Mr. Hosmer Angel disappeared "last Friday," "the 14th." So we look for a month, between March 1881 (when Holmes and Watson met) and September 1891 (when the case was published), when Friday was the 14th. The possibilities are October 1881, September 1883, October 1887, and September 1888. Baring-Gould eliminates 1881, 1883, and 1888 because Holmes was engaged on another case on the relevant days, and concludes that the disappearance was Friday, October 14, 1887. Next, Watson mentions that he opened the morning paper, so the date was not a Sunday; thus the case must have begun the next Monday through Thursday. The description of clothing implies mild weather, so he looks for two sequential warm clear days between Monday, October 17 and Thursday, October 20, 1887. Baring-Gould thus concludes that the case occurred Tuesday and Wednesday, October 18 and 19, 1887.

Other chronologies derive other dates for the story. We cite the reasoning as an example of the type of deduction, supported by research, employed in Holmesian analysis.

Your reaction might be: These people need a life. But you'd be missing the point. If that's your attitude, stop reading and go back to baseball statistics or Civil War trivia or whatever.

SPECULATION AND WHIMSY

Watson's inconsistencies have invited conjectures ranging from the logical and reasonable to the completely wacky. For example, his name is clearly John H. Watson except once when his wife called him "James." Dorothy Sayers speculated that the middle initial "H" must stand for "Hamish," the Scottish form of James--a neat resolution of the inconsistency. Others, of course, make other suggestions, ranging from two Watson brothers (John and James) to a prior love affair on Mrs. Watson's part and an unfortunate lapse. (Baring-Gould notes that "Conan Doyle named Watson for his friend James Watson, [so] the slip of the pen is understandable.")

Other subjects of continuing speculation include: Who were the Baskervilles and where is their hall? Did Holmes attend Oxford or Cambridge? What did Holmes do during the three years that Watson thought him dead?

Finally we reach your question: How was Holmes cured of his cocaine addiction?

In the late 1800s, there was neither popular prejudice nor laws against drugs as there are today. Laudanum and cocaine, among others, were readily available. Watson suspects but dismisses the idea of cocaine use by Holmes in A Study in Scarlet, his first published work. By The Sign of Four, Watson reports that when Holmes was bored and his mind not challenged, he took cocaine in a "seven-per-cent solution." This was not a heavy dose, but it was clearly enough to be habit-forming. Again in "The Yellow Face," Watson says that Holmes had no vices, "save for the occasional use of cocaine."

Michael Harrison notes, "that Holmes had a serious addiction, all Watson's descriptions of Holmes nervous activity makes clear: the restlessness, the ability to work for days without adequate sleep, and even without rest at all; the abrupt changes of mood; and the equally abrupt collapse into a somnolence not far (if at all) removed from a torpor bordering on coma: these are the unmistakable evidence of heavy and prolonged indulgence in some powerful narcotic.""

And yet, after Holmes's encounter with Moriarty and supposed death at Reichenbach Falls, he never again uses cocaine. Or at least Watson doesn't mention it.

And so the question: how did he break the habit?

In 1974, Nicholas Meyer published The Seven-Per-Cent Solution. The forward describes how he found an unpublished, unedited manuscript of John H. Watson. The book jacket, in fact, says "Being a Reprint from the Reminiscences of John H. Watson, M.D. as edited by Nicholas Meyer."

I shan't give away too much of the plot. Watson tricks Holmes into visiting Sigmund Freud and submitting himself to treatment. Freud cures him of the cocaine habit, and of a few paranoid cocaine-induced delusions along the way. This all happened (according to Meyer, according to Watson) during the period when Holmes was believed dead, 1891-1893. Watson simply invented the stories of Holmes' death and return to cover the fact that Holmes was in seclusion for medical treatment.

Holmes reciprocates, helping Dr. Freud solve a mystery regarding one of his patients. So Meyer's book is more than two great personalities getting together to "talk about cocaine"--it's a mystery story.

Many authorities, of course, doubt the authenticity of Meyer's manuscript, and proclaim it pure fiction.

Does that answer your question?

I'd like to conclude with another question: why does Sherlock Holmes endure?

Obviously, part of the answer is that Doyle--or Watson if you prefer--was a marvelous story-teller. The tales today have lost none of their charm or intrigue.

But there's more to it than that. From the introduction to the first volume (1998) of The Sherlock Holmes Reference Library: "The Sherlock Holmes stories fascinate. They transport readers of all ages, nationalities, and cultures into a world of their own. They challenge our imaginations."

In the 1940s Edgar W. Smith wrote, "We love the times in which he lived, of course, the half-remembered, half-forgotten times of snug Victorian illusion, of gaslit comfort and contentment, of perfect dignity and grace. And we love the place: the England of those times, fat with the fruits of her achievements, but strong and daring still with the spirit of imperial adventure. But there is more than time and space and the yearning of things gone by to account for what we feel toward Sherlock Holmes. Not only there and then, but here and now, he stands as a symbol, if you please, of all that we are not, but ever would be. We see him as the fine expression of our urge to trample evil and to set aright the wrongs with which the world is plagued. He is Galahad and Socrates, bringing high adventure to our dull existences and calm, judicial logic to our biased minds."

Vincent Starrett wrote of Holmes and Watson:

they still live for all that love them well: in a romantic chamber of the heart: in a nostalgic country of the mind: where it is always 1895.

RESOURCES:

Baring-Gould, William S.; The Annotated Sherlock Holmes, Clarkson N. Potter, Inc, New York, 1967.

Harrison, Michael, In the Footsteps of Sherlock Holmes, Cassel & Co. Ltd, London, 1958

Klinger, Leslie S. (editor), The Sherlock Holmes Reference Library, Gasogene Books, Indianapolis, currently being published in separate volumes, beginning in 1998

Starrett, Vincent, The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (revised), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1960

and, of course, the Canon:

A Study in Scarlet The Sign of Four The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes The Hound of the Baskervilles The Return of Sherlock Holmes His Last Bow The Valley of Fear The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes

— Dex

STAFF REPORTS ARE WRITTEN BY THE STRAIGHT DOPE SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD, CECIL'S ONLINE AUXILIARY. THOUGH THE SDSAB DOES ITS BEST, THESE COLUMNS ARE EDITED BY ED ZOTTI, NOT CECIL, SO ACCURACYWISE YOU'D BETTER KEEP YOUR FINGERS CROSSED.

#Sherlock Holmes #The Straight Dope #Chicago Reader

0 notes