And towards the end of this booklet is an illustration of Holmes and Watson in a romantic embrace.
As I have let be known here before I am not a fan of most fan fiction in general and 'shipping' of Holmes and Watson in particular.
Now I guess this can be taken as I have no sympathy for the LGBT community, but that would be very untrue and of no need to be discussed in this format.
I really don't care if 'fans' want their Holmes and Watson to be lovers, to each his own.
I just don't make that a choice of my reading.
The biggest problem with this display is the strange need too some how have to explain the sexual relationship between these two men and why that has become such a big part of Sherlockian lore now. And why that in the world of Sherlock Holmes that is becoming the acceptable norm. We are asked in society now to accept people for who they are, yet there is now a need to have this 'shipped' relationship continually played out and that if we don't like it, we just aren't open minded enough.
I found Elinor Gray's writing very good, and her style worthy of a good pastiche on Holmes and Watson. She knows her subject, and is indeed a fan. However, her agenda was always apparent (I guess as an agenda should be) from the very beginning, and I only continued to read the booklet hoping that I would be surprised at how it turned out. I was not.
While inside the her story was indeed the possibility of a good mystery, it was not allowed to be enough and really only provided filler for her purpose.
Now with that said, I have no problem with Ms. Gray wanting to write this type of fan fiction, and I am sure there is a willing audience for that kind of work. But to have a society like the John H Watson publish it to a membership paying group of people is, to me, troubling.
There is, no matter how well it is written, no scholarly value to it, with the exception of creating a discussion on the subject. But with no Canonical references included to back up her claim (which I am sure was not her intention) it was hardly worthy.
I was very disappointed that such a talented writer could not make a stronger case for the, well, case than for Holmes and Watson's romantic relationship.
But like I said, it is not so much about the subject matter, as not having a choice whether to add it to my collection or not. Yea, I know, if I don't like it I can give it away or something. But that is not the point. The JHWS is now making a non-scholarly stance on the sexuality of Holmes and Watson and members dues are helping to make that happen.
As I have said, I am not a big fan of 'fan fiction' but will defend others rights to write it and read it, even if the best you can do is 'ship' these two.
I do however not want to participate in it.
I don't understand how the most important thing you can come up with about Holmes and Watson is their imagined love life.
I have not read every single thing published in the JHWS publications, so maybe I have missed this position of theirs in the past. But I am not sure I want to continue membership in a group that wants to support a 'shipped' relationship of Holmes and Watson.
I apologize to all those more used to using phrases like, 'shipping' and 'shipped' if I used them wrong.
Kinda of like fan fiction, I find those words annoying.
My first response is to discontinue my membership with the society ( a gasp goes up!) but will think about it a little longer and see what kind of response this gets.
I would imagine with this rant my readership will drop in half, so the the two remaining readers, thanks mom and dad for sticking by me.
Dear John, let me say first I completely understand how you feel about shipping Holmes and Watson and that not having an interest in it should not be equated with any prejudice. But let me also comment on your premise: "But to have a society like the John H Watson publish it to a membership paying group of people is, to me, troubling. There is, no matter how well it is written, no scholarly value to it, with the exception of creating a discussion on the subject. But with no Canonical references included to back up her claim (which I am sure was not her intention) it was hardly worthy. I was very disappointed that such a talented writer could not make a stronger case for the, well, case than for Holmes and Watson's romantic relationship." Pastiches are written for entertainment and not for scholarship, although both can coexist in a work, such as "Seven Per-Cent Solution". Pastiche can also stimulate discussion within the Game and/or the world-at-large. As entertainment value of any one thing is subjective, we can only decide what we like or dislike through personal feelings, although there are objective criteria that can be employed. As you fairly pointed out: "Elinor Gray's writing very good, and her style worthy of a good pastiche on Holmes and Watson. She knows her subject, and is indeed a fan." That that positive assessment couldn't override, for you, the piece's shortcomings is also fair.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I must also point out that "to have a society like the John H Watson publish it to a membership paying group of people is, to me, troubling" and that "JHWS is now making a non-scholarly stance on the sexuality of Holmes and Watson and members dues are helping to make that happen" are not correct assessments. The cost of dues would be the price it is regardless of whether we published a Fiction Series or not. It is, as Holmes would say, one of the "extras". Also, it is unfair to say that JHWS is taking a stance on Holmes and Watson's sexuality. The criteria I go by as Editor-in-Chief of the magazine is whether something is worthy enough to be published in The Watsonian and I have no litmus tests on what goes in based on my politics or personal views. Nor do I think there should be taboo subjects as long as they are tastefully and respectfully handled. I think you'll agree that "The Duelist and the Doctor" was PG at the most. The fact that "gay Holmes" is part of the zeitgeist of Sherlockiana is something that cannot be ignored, and explorations of Canonical sexually in an adult fashion has been part of the scholarship for sometime, and won't be ignored by The Watsonian.
The JHWS values all points of view, including yours and if you leave the society, the society will be the lesser for it. I would certainly miss "Watsonian Wit". With friendship, James
I always respect your point of view, and if I understand you correctly Pastiches are going to be part of the format of JHWS I will now accept that as part of the course. I still do not like it, especially as there was no scholarly connection.
DeleteSo in fan fiction do we now start saying Holmes was a great detective or a great gay detective?
My point is, why does that need to be important and aren't we past having to make that distiction.
It is not only my personal dislike of the 'shipping' of Holmes and Watson, but I feel a big disrepect of Doyle and his writings.
She is a talented writer and it is a shame she has limited her point of view on the Canon of Sherlock Holmes.
As always, thanks for you comments James.
Let me say again that you don't have to worry about your dues being used to pay for a project you're not interested in. Going forward, due to printing costs, if we have another Fiction Series booklet, it will have to be ordered and paid for separately. As for your question above, my personal opinion is that Sherlockians are generally a welcoming group when it comes to enthusiasts of Sherlock Holmes, however we have come to a point in time where "Sherlock Holmes" has different meanings to different people. Are you a Sherlockian if you're a fan of a TV show and not the original 60 stories? Are you a Sherlockian if you collect animal figurines wearing deerstalker, but have read some of the stories and like them but not a enthusiast? Are you a Sherlockian if you only like the comic books? Are you a Sherlockian if the 60 stories are your primary interest? It a big topic and one that Sherlockians have barely begun to grapple with.
ReplyDeleteI like the fact that I will be a pay if you want to play for books like that.
DeleteI still think that someone as talented as Ms. Gray is wasting it on such a narrow audience.
To bad.
We all have our own lines that should not be crossed, like you said. But none the less, it is what it is.
Although I like and read slash (some of it at least) I can't but agree with what you said here, "I don't understand how the most important thing you can come up with about Holmes and Watson is their imagined love life."
ReplyDeleteSometimes it seems that's all there is to read and all everyone in fandom is talking about all the f...*beep* time - and I'm fed up to the gills with it. For me SH's sexual orientation and romantic leanings are the least interesting things about him.
It is a fixation that seems to rather narrow their audience.
Delete