SHIN -It is really the holiday season now! BRAD in the news with pictures!

For Sherlock Holmes fans, appeal is elementary

Braley Dodson
Journal Star reporter 

Follow @@braleydodson

Posted Dec. 19, 2015 at 7:09 PM
Updated Dec 19, 2015 at 7:12 PM 

PEORIA — For a fictional detective who lived in the 1800s, Sherlock Holmes still is very much alive. To his fans, anyway.

“Every generation has their Sherlock Holmes,” said Bradley Keefauver, creator of the blog Sherlock Peoria.

A small, adult crowd gathered Saturday afternoon for the Peoria Public Library’s Baker Street Bash to listen to Keefauver talk and answer questions on Sherlock Holmes lore, answer trivia questions and go on a scavenger hunt, among other activities.

“He is someone you can almost see existing,” said Keefauver, who wore a T-shirt advertising “Sure-lock and Watts-on Security and Electrical Consulting,” which depicted Holmes as a lock and his sidekick, John Watson, as a light bulb.

He said with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s characters in the public domain, a new novel starring the detective is released nearly every week. With multiple television shows, movies, novels and fanfictions, everyone has a different entry point into the Holmes universe.

“Each remake inspires new interest,” said Jamie Jones, branch manager of the McClure Branch.

“It keeps being brought back.”

The event was planned to tie in to the upcoming Christmas special of the BBC’s “Sherlock,” a contemporary interpretation.

Standing on a low stage, Jones asked the crowd for the address of Holmes and Watson. A quiet chorus of “221B Baker St.,” answered her, followed by a whispered, “that’s easy.” But her questions got harder until the crowd was partially stumped when she asked what Irene Adler’s measurements were from an episode of “Sherlock.” Finally, she awarded a newly released book on Mycroft Holmes to Curt Bier of East Peoria, who won the trivia contest.

Bier remembers becoming a fan after reading “The Hound of the Baskervilles” in junior high school.

“I’m glad they had an event like this,” he said, his new book, which he had previously planned to check out from the library, on his lap.

Jones said another Baker Street Bash, which could include a murder mystery, might be held when the new season of “Sherlock” is released.

Braley Dodson can be reached at 686-3196 and bdodson@pjstar.com. Follow her on Twitter @BraleyDodson.

Source 

What does it say about you?

What The Sherlock Archetype Teaches Us About Ourselves

Archetypes are useful but risky storytelling tools. Used poorly, they oversimplify, silence nuance, and induce cliches, but used well, they can leverage existing social and cultural forces to powerful effect, potentially critiquing those very same forces. Furthermore, enduring archetypes reveal aspects of culture both good and bad. What we like tells us a lot about who we are. Since his invention by Edgar Allen Poe in three short stories featuring C. Auguste Dupin, the "brilliant detective who is also a total jerk" archetype has become a fixture in our culture, most popularly and powerfully through the interpretations of Sherlock Holmes, a fixture that reveals some of the bad and some of the good in our society.

First, the bad. The "high functioning sociopath" oozes white male privilege. What would happen if an African-American detective walked into a crime scene and talked to the police officers the way Holmes does? There are a few answers to this question (though, "He'd get arrested" and "He'd get shot" are probably the most likely) but he certainly wouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt, or be allowed to flaunt regulations, and he certainly wouldn't be deferred to. How long would an African-American detective broadcasting arrogance and casual disregard keep his job in Louisiana? Certainly not as long as Rust Cohle. The Sherlockian character can only exist, in part, because of the inherent deference our culture still gives to white men, no matter how they behave. White men, in general, can get away with being jerks, so, obviously, white men who are also geniuses who solve crimes, would get an even greater pass for bad behavior.

And then there's the "male" part of the privilege. An assumption of "emotional-ness" still smothers female characters (and authors) with enough influence that I doubt anyone would read a book or "We love it when Sherlock is cruel. Or at least we are entertained by his cruelty, his arrogance, his casual disregard for society, for authority, for, really, anything that doesn't come from his own brain."watch a show featuring a woman acting like Holmes. The closest I've seen to a female version of this archetype is Temperance Brennan from Kathy Reich's "Bones" series, but even though she has the genius for detail, the brilliance of deduction, and the logically dictated disconnect from the emotions of society, she at least tries to be decent human being. She participates in the game of decency. She doesn't use her logic and brilliance maliciously. She isn't intentionally cruel.

And yet, we love it when Sherlock is cruel. Or at least we are entertained by his cruelty, his arrogance, his casual disregard for society, for authority, for, really, anything that doesn't come from his own brain. There is something about the "genius who is an asshole" that is persistently entertaining.

A part of is is our relationship to confidence, another part in how we interact with "geniuses" or "great men," but the most interesting, to me, anyway, aspect of the appeal of the character is much more visceral and much more mundane. We've all been in line behind someone at the coffee shop who just can't make up his mind, and we've all wanted to tell said person exactly how useless they must be as a human being. We've all had bosses and managers with the professional intelligence of a slime mold, whose incomprehensible decisions and directives make our working days hellish and wanted to tell them the exact receptacle into which their latest productivity policy should be shoved. The jerk taking up three seats on the subway, or stopped in the absolute middle of the sidewalk looking up at the buildings, or has their cell phone on speaker phone in a public place for some goddamn reason. Through the Sherlock Holmes character, we vicariously say all the cruel, malicious, arrogant, and dismissive things we long to say to frustrating strangers, bosses, and friends.

The thing is, you're still pretty likely to get away with saying the things Holmes does. Most of the "Through the Sherlock Holmes character, we vicariously say all the cruel, malicious, arrogant, and dismissive things we long to say to frustrating strangers, bosses, and friends"time, if you call the guy ahead of you in line a jerk or an idiot, nothing tangibly and immediately bad is going to happen to you. That guy is most likely not going to punch you in the face even though he might want to. You're probably not going to get arrested or shot.

Even as we wish to be Sherlock Holmes in isolated moments in our lives, we appreciate the social conventions that ensure he is an aberration. We fundamentally value the emotional connection to other people, even bosses and strangers, that is facilitated by keeping some of that rage inside. Yes, every now and then (maybe every day, depending on your commute) we wish for the ability to tell someone how awful we think they are, but we are also grateful for a society in which we can reasonably expect to get through most days without someone telling us they think we're awful. Through the Sherlockian archetype we can have our cake and eat it too, experiencing the freedom of social disregard while living in a world of social regard.

Archetypes are oversimplifications, images and myths devoid of the nuances of reality, but they still speak to fundamental aspects of our culture and their successful use in a work of art depends entirely on how the artist uses their oversimplifications. For all his flaws, and for all the flaws he reveals in our culture, ultimately, Sherlock Holmes and all the jerk detectives in his lineage, demonstrate just how much we appreciate the illogical and utterly meaningless social conventions that get us from the start of our day to the end of it with a relative minimum of emotional and social anguish. He allows us to vicariously enjoy his callous freedom, while appreciating the conventions that almost guarantee we never have to deal with someone like that in real life.

Josh Cook is the author of An Exaggerated Murder (Melville House).

Source

What do you want to be called?

Sherlockian/Holmesian Brad has done his part, in a recent post, of rekindling the debates of "Are you a Sherlockian or a Holmesian" and "what should fans be called."
The source of this discussional rebirth can be found here.
The argument put forth in the blog he referred to actually has nothing to do with what any of us should be called, but rather which show, Elementary or Sherlock, the author preferred and his reasons for his choice.

Although I agreed with many of his points, I did contest his use of Sherlockians as the name used to describe fans of Sherlock.
If he had put forth the name before it was already being used I think it would have stuck.
But it has already been taken.

But what do you prefer to be called? Our do you prefer not having to put a name on your 'hobby' at all.
I usually refer to my self as a Sherlockian when talking to people who may know what that means or at least likely to be able to figure it out.
When talking to folks who may require an explanation if I use Sherlockian, I usually just say I am a big 'follower' of Sherlock Holmes, what ever that means and I guess in many ways that to would require an explanation of its own.
I have probably even used the term 'fan' at times in more casual settings. (Please forgive me.)

So, what do you think of yourself as? And does it change depending on who you talk to depending on whether or not an explanation would be required.

Would you rather be called a 'fan' than be called 'Irregular'?

Which makes you bristle and which makes you hold your head high.

Do you agree?

10 Best Sherlock Holmes Film Adaptations

36 pictures of your favorite or not so favorite Holmes and Watson's

Source

SHIN - More on Mark

'I Am Basically Drawn to Anything Vaguely Odd': Sherlock and Game of Thrones Star Mark Gatiss

by Rishi Alwani, December 22, 2014

A vanity van parked in one corner of an extremely noisy exhibition centre hosting the Mumbai Film and Comic Con is as weird a place as any to interview anyone, particularly when all that separates you from a horde of fans is a makeshift wooden wall. It's in this setting that NDTV Gadgets caught up with Mark Gatiss - the writer and actor extraordinaire who is most recognisable for playing the Braavosi banker Tycho Nestoris in the HBO adaptation of Game of Thrones, and Sherlock Holmes' brother Mycroft on the BBC adaptation of Sherlock.

Gatiss also has writing credits for Sherlock and Doctor Who, making him a bit of a legend in geek circles. The man himself cuts a figure that's as interesting as any of the characters he's written, and he's managed both acting and writing very successfully. But which one of these hats does he prefer and why?

"I like both hats, it's hard to wear two hats, so I have one hat divided down the middle," he jokes. "I've always done both and I love doing both and it keeps everything very varied and interesting and I did a lot of filming this year, I've written three scripts but I've done an awful lot of shooting and it's been very enjoyable. Equally I like sitting at home and writing half year and acting the rest of it."

That's probably why so much of Gatiss' work is so beloved in geek circles - he comes across as someone who really enjoys what he does. Gatiss is one of the rare few who finds himself in arguably three of the biggest TV shows - Doctor Who, Sherlock, and Game of Thrones. Each of them are diverse universes ranging from the modern day to sci-fi to gritty fantasy. But which one does Gatiss hold dearest?

"I'm a tiny part of Game of Thrones, it's a very violent world. Sherlock's world is kind of our world - so probably Doctor Who because you can go anywhere," he says. And while Gatiss admits to being a big fan of grimness in stories like Game of Thrones, if you're familiar with Doctor Who and Sherlock, you know that as a writer, Gatiss is drawn to whimsy and humor even in straight, serious pieces.

"I'm a big fan of grimness, but I think for my own stuff it always tends to be a bit funnier, lighter but also... I'm basically drawn to anything vaguely odd," he says.

Gatiss is no stranger to dealing with odd scenarios. He tells us that straight-laced stories aren't for him.

"Many years ago I was asked to write a police series and I just couldn't do it. I didn't even try. After two meetings I said there's no monsters in it or no kind of strange crimes I just can't do it. It would be awful, it would be too straightforward for me," he explains.

Instead, he ended up working on what is probably the most famous set of stories about detectives and investigations - Sherlock Holmes. We're all the better for it what with Sherlock turning out the way it did. He reminiscences as to when he and his writing partner Steven Moffat had an inkling that they had a hit on their hands.

"When we were filming the pilot, Benedict and Martin were in the back of the taxi when Sherlock does that deduction about his phone," he says. "It was an enormous thing. The first time Benedict did it I got quite teary. That's based on a famous deduction with Watson's watch (in The Sign of Four) and I thought this is our version - there they are - it's our Sherlock and Dr. Watson."

The duo of Cumberbatch and Freeman exuded a kind of chemistry that had Gatiss confident about the show's success. Cumberbatch was the only actor who read for the role of Sherlock before Moffat and Gatiss made up their mind, Gatiss tells us.

"Benedict was the only person that we saw, we did have a very very long list but we didn't pay any attention," he says. "We all came to the same conclusion at the same time. I knew him. He played Stephen Hawking and he was in a film called Atonement. He came in and read. That was it. He was perfect. We saw six people for Dr. Watson and as soon as he and Martin read, we knew that was the show."

Of course, both actors careers have bloomed since Sherlock came around - both are now appearing in big blockbuster movies but Gatiss tells us that the actors' presence has not overshadowed their characters.

"People would pay to see them as John and Sherlock all the time," says Gatiss. "The only problem is its harder to get everyone back together to make more. Not because they're not willing but it is about trying to get diaries to align."

Part of the challenge lies in the format of Sherlock - it's not a continuing series with dozens of new episodes each year - even HBO shows get 10 episodes each season to develop the narrative. Sherlock gets three episodes each season. That's why, for instance, the creators wanted to make sure that fans weren't left wondering about Sherlock's death; Gatiss says he would rather leave cliffhangers to the show itself.

"We knew we were going to do some more," he says. "By doing three movie length stories every season, everything was sort of telescoped. We brought in Moriarty and Mycroft quicker than what we would have done if it had been a longer series. If we did 12 one hour episodes it would have been a slower build and so with the the Reichenbach Fall we sort of had five minutes with him definitely dead."

"Also it was the best cliffhanger that you could imagine," Gatiss continues. "I remember the day I told Steven we should be in the graveyard and the very last shot is Sherlock looking at his own grave. But yes, we had no idea it would become as huge as it was. It was an international talking point for two years." On the topic of Gatiss and Moffat, we wondered how the writing duties for a show as nuanced as Sherlock are divided. Gatiss tells us it's as per their interests

"In series two Steven was very drawn to the kind of messed up, upside down love story of A Scandal in Belgravia," he says. "I was originally going to write The Reichenbach Fall but he said, 'every time you talk about the Hound of The Baskervilles your eyes light up.' Because it was a gothic horror story and I was trying to write a modern version in which the ghostly bits were sort of became about conspiracy theories and stuff like that, it was very interesting. We're drawn to our own particular enthusiasms."

The enthusiasm could lead Gatiss to adaptations beyond Sherlock as well. There's a spark in his eye when we ask him what his wishlist of literary masterpieces are that he'd like to bring into the modern day.

"There's a lot of big books I'd like to do," he says. "There's a particular one which I can't talk about which I might be doing. But its very exciting. I'd like to do some HG Wells." However when pressed further, he remains tight-lipped signing off with, "those big science fiction romances are rather nice but nothing imminent."

Source

New feature - Sherlock Holmes in the News - SHIN for short

Mark Gatiss reveals what went into setting Sherlock Holmes in a technological era.

Source

The task of modernizing Sherlock Holmes in today's technological era is not an easy one. Krishna Bahirwani speaks to Mark Gatiss to find out how he took on the challenge while serving multiple roles in the creation of today's Sherlock.

• Getty Images

How much psychological research went into making Sherlock?

Oh, a lot . We talked a lot about how to position Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watsonin the modern day, How he would be percieved, what sort of person he was. I think, basically, he is the the same as the 19th century Sherlock but a lot of things have changed since then, a lot of things have been diagonalized . I think you can read between the lines in Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock is definitely depressive, there are long periods of time he sits on the sofa and doesn't move, he's bi-polar,.He's probably on the autistic spectrum. We did think a lot about all of that, about how people would percieve him. They would have just thought he was odd in the 18th and 19th century.

What was it like writing and acting in the same show?

It's great because if I want to change a line I can just do it, without having to ask for anyone's permission.It's good, I mean I've always done it from The League of Gentleman onwards. I'm pretty familiar. You can move around from behind the camera to in front of it and keep an eye on the whole thing. I am there virtually every day of the shoot anyway as an executive producer and it just helps.

Why do you release such few episodes every year?

Well, because we cannot do it any other way. The original plan was to make six, hour-long episodes. We made the first one, which sort of became a pilot, and the BBC said they would commission it if we made three nintey minute episdoes really because of a series called Wallander, which became a really big success for them. Then it became an absolute phenomenon making it impossible to do it any quicker and now thats how we do it, three episodes every two years or so.

What role has technology played in the modernization of Sherlock?

Well a big part in the sense that we were from the beginning trying to find equivalences. Originally Sherlock sent a lot of telegrams, texting became the equivalent. There are things that have become very familiar about policework , really the thing is Sherlock's world is a hieghtened version of ours , its not just a grim police procedural, its an adventure series so the villian's are larger than life, the golem in series one is a 7 ft 2" bald assasin , if it was real life he would be a gangster who smashes peoples heads, thats not our show. We bought in a lot things, text on the screen and things like that, he uses his phone. The original sherlock holmes had all the information orgnaized in his head now its all on his phone.

What has been the most challenging part of your work with Sherlock so far?

It's hard to write as it gobles up story, a ninety minute script is routinely a hundred and forty pages because it moves so quickly, it's massive and it shouldnt be but it just moves so quickly . Just trying to get everyone to come back to do it is hard even though everybody is so keen about it.

How does technology affect the writing aspect of Sherlock?

We try to find new visual ways of what is going on in Sherlocks head and that has been copied even by a lot of shows. People on the team come up with new toys and say look at this and its like that. New cameras, new lenses, are brought in, we got a new camera coming up for the special. It is so new that there are only about three around. It's amazing, it's exciting

How challenging is it to write or portray a character that you want the audience to perceive as intelligent?

You have to sort of try and be the right kind of clever, the deductions are definitely the hardest thing . If you think of a good one, you have to write it down instantly, its a bit like a magic trick, you have to explain enough of it to make it work, but if you explain everything it ceases to be magic.

Get your fun suits on!

‘Sherlock Holmes’ and ‘Doctor Who’ 

theme park attractions in the works

Crime-solvers and sci-fi nerds unite—a theme park expansion just for you is reportedly on the way. 

BBC Worldwide has just signed a more than $3 billion deal with U.K. property developer London Resort Company Holdings (LRCH) and Paramount Pictures that will have attractions including those based on “Doctor Who,” and “Sherlock Holmes” reports the Guardian. The new theme park would be built by the Thames estuary in north Kent.

According to David Testa, a director for LRCH, the new development will “combine the glamour of Hollywood with the best of British culture.”

The new park would attract foreign and domestic tourists with rides, characters and other attractions based on “Doctor Who,” “Sherlock Holmes” and “Top Gear.”

“We’re always looking for opportunities to extend fans’ enjoyment of their favorite shows and the idea behind this resort is a really exciting way of celebrating the very special place the BBC has in British culture,” said Stephen Davies, director of live events at BBC Worldwide, at a press event.

Paramount and LRCH already have an agreement that grants the developer access to the entertainment company’s vast library of movies including "Mission: Impossible," "Star Trek," "The Godfather" and "The Italian Job."

If construction unfolds according to plan, the park could be open as early as Easter of 2020.

Source

Just in from the BBC - Was Holmes the first caped crusader?

The world-wide fascination in Sherlock Holmes' tweed cape

By Steven McKenzieBBC Scotland Highlands and Islands reporter

A Sidney Paget illustration of Sherlock Holmes and his companion Dr John Watson

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• Fashion week's Sherlock cape crusade

The organisers of a Scottish fashion event have announced plans to reinvigorate interest in the Inverness cape, a sleeveless tweed overcoat made famous by Sherlock Holmes.

Highlands Fashion Week will officially launch its Bring Back The Cape (BBTC) project on its website on 4 December.

Describing it as an "exclusive" and "secret" project, the organisers have said that they hope to revamp the clothing that is usually worn with a kilt and "make it current".

For hundreds of people across the world, the cape as worn by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famous fictional sleuth, continues to have great appeal.

Benedict Cumberbatch's Sherlock has favoured a Milford Coat over an Inverness Cape

How the popular image of Sherlock Holmes' look came about is a curious case.

The illustrated monthly magazine, The Strand, printed many of Conan Doyle's mysteries in the 1890s, with the author's words accompanied by engravings by talented Finchley-based artist Sidney Paget.

Many Inverness Capes made in Scotland are exported to the US

According to The Sherlock Holmes Society of London, it was Paget who gave the detective his "now iconic image" - the "hawk-like features, deerstalker cap and Inverness cape".

Paget produced 201 Sherlock Holmes's illustrations between 1891 and 1893 and a further 155 between 1901 and 1904.

But Paget had been sent the commission for the artwork by mistake.

Pinacotheca Holmesiana, a website dedicated to Sherlock stories and illustrations, said the job was meant for his younger brother Walter.

Walter still managed to put his stamp on the sleuth. He modelled for his brother's illustrations for the magazine.

Decades later, in television adaptations of the stories, the cape and cap continued to be a key part of Sherlock's wardrobe.

More recent TV portrayals, such as BBC's Sherlock and CBS series Elementary, have since restyled the detective.

In Sherlock, Benedict Cumberbatch's character wears a Belstaff Milford Coat - a heavy, wool tweed overcoat first made in the 1920s and inspired by the late 19th Century great coat.

Yet the image of Holmes in an Inverness cape of more than 120 years ago endures.

Steampunk enthusiasts are among those with an interest in the Inverness cape

Mister Antony (Inverness Cape Specialists) in Newton Mearns, near Glasgow, makes Inverness raincapes in various waterproof fabrics for pipe bands all over the world.

About 90% of the business's work is concerned with manufacturing this garment for pipers and drummers.

In 2003, the firm developed a new waterproof cape called the Bandspec Raincape. The company worked with Robert Mathieson, at the time pipe major with Shotts and Dykehead Caledonia Pipe Band, on the new design.

The Museum of London has a new exhibition on Sherlock Holmes

Mister Antony is also one of the few business that makes and supplies traditional wool and Harris Tweed Inverness capes to "professional, discerning" customers.

The patterns on offer include stony blue fleck, grey herringbone and brown and tan houndstooth.

Antony Mistofsky, who has run the firm for 32 years and whose family has been making waterproof clothing for more than 100 years, said the custom-made items represented "a specialised, niche market".

He said: "It would be fair to say that they are not a big selling item.

"We sell hundreds and not thousands of them. They can cost upwards from £600 depending on what the customer wants."

Mr Mistofsky added: "We export them all over the world. Sixty to 70% of the woollen capes are exported, mainly to the USA.

"The customers who want these items are mainly professional individuals - lawyers and doctors, a High Court judge - and they buy either to wear with a kilt or as an alternative to a heavy overcoat."

'Global icon'

A few of those buying the woollen capes also have a keen interest in Sherlock Holmes, he said.

Other Inverness Cape enthusiasts include fans of steampunk, a genre that mixes Victorian-style clothing with science-fiction technology and draws inspiration from writers such as HG Wells. Various online retailers offer the capes in colours suited to steampunk aficionados.

Highlands Fashion Week's BBTC project, meanwhile, is timely.

Last month, Museum of London opened the exhibition Sherlock Holmes: The Man Who Never Lived and Will Never Die.

It features displays of Conan Doyle manuscripts, copies of The Strand and some of the 27 surviving original drawings Paget did for the magazine stories.

The museum also commissioned a new tweed of a design and colour inspired by the trademark deerstalker and cape.

Alex Werner, head of history collections at the museum, said: "Sherlock Holmes is a global icon indelibly linked with London, so it is fitting that we are able to host this major celebration of Conan Doyle's creation at the Museum of London.

"This exhibition is really about gaining a deeper appreciation of the stories and it is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to see such a diverse collection of Sherlock Holmes artefacts and material under one roof."

The museum exhibition runs until April next year, while Highlands Fashion Week takes place in Inverness next month.

More on This Story

Related Stories

• Fashion week's Sherlock cape crusade
  31 OCTOBER 2014, HIGHLANDS & ISLANDS

Source

Special night for St Louis local Sherlockians who can make it.

With the International Sherlock Holmes Exhibition in town, some of our local Sherlockians have arranged a fun night for all those who can make it.

Post in comments if you need more info.

Hi all,

Here is the latest from the Sherlock Holmes Exhibit.

As you know, I have been working to get a 'local Sherlockian' presence at the November 7th "First Friday' event at the Science Center.  I have copied below my previous text on that night.  Anyway, I can now report that WE HAVE A ROOM at the Science Center that night.  The Conference of Sherlockians will begin at 9:00 pm in the A-B Meeting room downstairs at the Science Center.  This will give you time to view and participate in the exhibit (you'll need a good couple of hours), then meet together to discuss the exhibit, then finally attend the viewing of the final BBC 'Sherlock' episode in the Omnimax theater at 10 pm.  So it will be a COMPLETE evening of Sherlock Holmes.

There will also be a table display for local Sherlockian scions which is being created by the Center (free of charge) with some help from me.  So those in attendance can take shifts manning the table and discussing aspects of our meetings that might attract new-comers.

We need at least 10 Sherlockians to get the Group Rate of $12.00 per person.  This will pay for your admission into the exhibit.  The room and the Omnimax are courtesy of the Science Center.  

So let's get this together for the common Game of all scions!  Please either send me $12 to reserve your spot or RSVP on email and PROMISE and SWEAR on the lives of all the Violets in the Canon that you will pay me back and I will pick up our tickets.  Unfortunately, I cannot be there due to a contractual commitment with my band that night.  But I will arrange this and have the tickets available for all of you at the ticket counter in the Science Center.

Schedule for November 7:

ARRIVAL 6:30-7:00 PM

EXHIBITION Immediately following

CONFERENCE OF SHERLOCKIANS 9:00 PM in Meeting Room A-B downstairs

SHERLOCK Viewing in the Omnimax 10:00 PM

On the exhibit, it is VERY impressive!  I know some of you have already been there to check it out.  They could use more volunteers, especially if you have period clothing.  They like that so much they hired actors to wear Victorian attire in the exhibit.  It's all very cool!

Tomorrow, look for my thoughts on The International Sherlock Holmes Exhibition . . .

now proudly here in St. Louis.

Just in from Huff Post

Clay Farris Naff Become a fan 

Sherlock Holmes Versus God Almighty: Who Is More Real? The Multiverse Says Go With the Gumshoe

All stories are true.

On its face, this is a preposterous statement. By definition fiction is false. The tourists who for decades sought out 221B Baker Street in hopes of glimpsing Sherlock Holmes were barking up an imaginary tree after fictional prey: neither the address nor the sleuth existed. Since then, the address has come into existence as the Sherlock Holmes Museum and the story has been updated, but the man remains a myth. Benedict Cumberbatch only plays Holmes. There is no such person. The lawyer's familiar disclaimer, "Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental," guarantees it. Right?

Well, as physicist Sean Carroll likes to remind us, we live in a preposterous universe. If, as many cosmologists now argue, we occupy a dot in an endless multiverse, then all stories that can be true must be true. Somewhere out there, the real Sherlock pursues the real Moriarty. Somewhere out there Dudley Do-Right rescues Nell. Somewhere, Huck Finn and Jim really are drifting down the big river.

How can that be the case? As it appears, lots of ways. If the Totalitarian Principle holds, it cannot be otherwise. That principle of quantum mechanics, enunciated by Nobel laureate physicist Murray Gell-Mann, tells us "Everything not forbidden is compulsory."

In Our Mathematical Universe, physicist Max Tegmark points out that if the universe simply goes on forever, then just as a deck of cards endlessly shuffled and dealt will produce every possible hand, we must expect to find every possible combination of particles, including arrangements called Sherlock, Dudley, and Huck.

But Tegmark adds that the same result arrives if eternal inflation proves true. Inflation, the fantastically rapid swelling of the universe after the Big Bang, followed by a much slower local expansion, is the best explanation we have for the observable bubble around us. It, too, yields endless bubbles of every variety.

Brian Greene, in his book The Hidden Reality, concurs. Like Tegmark, he admits that multiverse ideas, though mathematically sound, are speculative. But Greene points with confidence to yet another route to everythingness: the Many Worlds understanding of quantum mechanics. In contrast to the multiverse, quantum weirdness is observable and undeniable. But explaining what goes on when a particle drops out of superposition has been, to say the least, a challenge.

Many Worlds is now the most widely accepted explanation -- among physicists, anyway. For the rest of us it is a jaw-dropping, "say whut, now?" kind of story. Quantum mechanics tells us that when a particle such as an electron decoheres out of the vagaries of superposition it could be anywhere -- though it is more likely to be "here" rather than "there."

Many Worlds tells us that what happens is the Universe, complete with a copy of you, me, and the electron, splits into many copies with outcomes proportional to the odds regarding "here" and "there." Most of the time you end up in the copy with high odds. Once in awhile you get a surprise. Seen from "above", everything happens. Including "fiction."

Well, not all fiction. Stories of the impossible -- say, Noah's flood or Harry Potter -- don't happen anywhere. Or do they? Tegmark and others encourage us to think about yet more universes, ones where the laws of physics themselves vary. Hah, you say. When pigs fly!

But why not? An endless multiverse need not have uniform laws. If the rules that govern the behavior of everything can take every possible form, then what's left on the forbidden list?

Mount your brooms! Bring on the flying pigs! Expecto Patronum!

Curiously, though, something is excluded. It comes not from science but from religion. That something is God. Traditional theism holds that God is supremely perfect in three ways: power, knowledge, and goodness.

A longstanding objection to this claim is the Problem of Evil. How, it asks, can a perfect being allow evil to exist? A body of apologetics devoted to staving off the Problem of Evil has followed, with answers that range from blaming Eve to disputing the existence of a best of all possible worlds.

In the teeth of an infinite multiverse, all these defenses collapse. A God who allows everything to happen makes no choices at all, and therefore cannot be a theistic God in any meaningful sense. At most, he can be a Creator, but that's hardly better. If all outcomes are realized, then there's no difference between a personal creator and an impersonal creative force.

This realization makes a paradox of the biblical claim "with God, all things are possible." If that dismays you, here are some comforting thoughts. Consider: if the more radical of multiverse scenarios is true, then somewhere must be a happy place called heaven where, the moment your earthly consciousness comes to an end, an identical copy of it will continue to exist. Sadly, however, the same must be true for an unpleasant place called hell.

Greater comfort, I think, is to be found in the realization that infinity is as problematic for science as it is for religion. Much as an infinitely perfect God leads to logical clashes with reality, an infinite multiverse bedevils attempts to apply tools such as probabilities to our understanding of the world. If everyone who buys a lottery ticket is a winner in some universe, why don't we all feel like winners? All those copies, including the one with the winning ticket, are genuinely us. What does it mean to hew to the average in an infinity of outcomes?

Of course, the world may be preposterous. Perhaps, like infinities, ultimate answers are unattainable or meaningless. But it's also possible that a more modest, elegant, and satisfying penultimate answer exists. The only way to know is to have faith in the future and to move ahead with an open-minded, rigorous search for as much of the truth as can be grasped -- the search we call science.

Credit where credit is due.

Just in from the BBC . . . . well, it's almost Friday