Interesting Interview: Charles Prepolec

Billing this week's interview subject as "interesting" may be underselling it.  Sherlockian editor, Strand completest, former mystery bookstore owner, and wearer of one of the finest mustaches in our hobby, Charles Prepolec is a Sherlockian who knows his stuff.  Widely knowledgeable about many facets of Sherlockiana, Charles is also an all-around good guy, someone who is fun to spend time with because he's probably the straightest shooter you'll ever meet.  If Charles has an opinion on something, he will share it.  And if he doesn't have an opinion on it, you can bet he will go out and learn enough to form one.  

I've known Charles online for a while now, and got to finally meet he and his wife, Kris, last summer in Minnesota (which seems like years ago).  Getting to see them again in New York this January and sitting with them in a corner booth during the ASH brunch was like being at the cool kids' table in the high school cafeteria.  Charles and Kris were so welcoming to everyone I saw them interact with that weekend, whether you were a longtime friend or newbie like myself.  And he brings that same vibe to this week's interview, expounding on our favorite topic: Sherlock Holmes.

So settle in, prepare your TBR list to have some titles added to it, and get ready to spend some time with Charles Prepolec!

How do you define the word “Sherlockian”?

For me, personally, becoming active in the 1980s, I tend to take a fairly traditional perspective on the term itself, if perhaps not the expression of it. That is to say I feel a Sherlockian should have a baseline familiarity with Arthur Conan Doyle’s canon of Sherlock Holmes stories, have an interest in discussing or researching elements of said canon, and want to engage and share with others of a similar bent; and, if possible, join or form a Sherlockian society.  These are the basics for me. If your interest is only in BBC Sherlock, or pastiches by a particular author, or whatever other single thing that is a derivative of the canon, but doesn’t necessarily include an appreciation of the canon, then I tend to think you’re a fan of that particular thing, and not necessarily a ‘Sherlockian’ by my definition. Your mileage will, of course, vary. In the end though, it’s just a word used as a label, so I’m not terribly precious about its usage one way or another these days.    

How did you become a Sherlockian?

As a kid, and an only child at that, I was a massive geek. Comic books were my all and everything, and also something of a ‘gateway’ to classic genre literature, particularly in the SF, fantasy, adventure and mystery genres. From comics I made the jump to Doc Savage and The Shadow pulp reprints, James Bond books and movies, Edgar Rice Burroughs, etc… and along the way I’d bump into Sherlock Holmes on a regular basis, as one does with literary archetypes.

Phil Farmer’s Wold Newton concept, expressed in DOC SAVAGE: HIS APOCALYPTIC LIFE, put Holmes on the same family tree as Doc Savage. Otto Penzler’s THE PRIVATE LIVES OF SPIES, CRIMEFIGHTERS AND OTHER GOOD GUYS I bought for coverage on The Shadow and James Bond, but there was a chapter on Sherlock Holmes, so there he was again. So, at 10 years of age I read The Hound of the Baskervilles… and hated it. That Sherlock Holmes guy was barely even in it. Pfui!

Jump ahead to ten years later, and I was still a comic book nerd, but one who was now following artists I liked. One such artist was Gene Day, who had been handling inks and then full art on MASTER OF KUNG FU, which in turn introduced me to the work of his brothers Dan and David Day who would handle some of the inking. One day in the mid 80s I walked into a comic book shop and CASES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES number 1, with art by Dan and David Day and the original Arthur Conan Doyle story text from The Adventure of The Beryl Coronet, caught my eye.

I loved everything about it. That led me to buy a cheap edition of THE ADVENTURES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES. Timing being what it is, I had just broken up with a girlfriend, so when I read the words ‘To Sherlock Holmes she is always the woman’ I was entirely hooked. At the same time, the Jeremy Brett Granada series was on PBS, the STUD centenary was coming up, and I stumbled across a meeting notice for a local Sherlock Holmes group in a bookstore, so I went to a meeting. In addition to our local group, I also ended up joining The Bootmakers of Toronto, the Sherlock Holmes Society of London and The Sydney Passengers of Australia. Becoming a Sherlockian became sort of unavoidable.    

What is your favorite canonical story?

The Sign of Four. To me it’s a perfect representation of a readable late Victorian romance novel (romance then being largely applied to any sort of adventure fiction) with a recognizable Holmes, rather than the proto-Holmes of STUD, and a wonderfully gothic and exotic tone. The Watson watch deduction sequence is probably the best in the entire Canon, and hell, Watson even gets the girl, either of which alone makes it a standout story.

Who is a specific Sherlockian that you think others would find interesting?

I find most Sherlockians interesting, but if you’re not familiar with Greg D. Ruby, of Baltimore, you should be. I first met Greg on a Christopher Morley Walk during the New York Birthday Weekend in 2015 (I think, it was) while he was recovering from a severe ankle injury. Anyone crazy enough to go on an extended walking tour while nursing that sort of injury is someone I wanted to know, and we’ve been friends ever since.

In addition to being a charming companion at gatherings, a fellow aficionado of German beer and cuisine, with an incredible knowledge of odd Sherlock Holmes appearances in television commercials and animated shorts, Greg founded and manages The Fourth Garrideb scion society, a group that focuses on coin collecting (numismatics) related to the Sherlock Holmes stories. His research is remarkable and the regular newsletter mailings and updates to the website are a veritable treasure trove of new, odd and interesting collectibles that go well beyond coins. Now celebrating it’s sixth anniversary, I strongly urge readers here to go along to https://fourthgarrideb.com/ and check out Greg’s handiwork. 

What subset of Sherlockiana really interests you?

I’m a collector by nature, so that is my main focus, but I’m also heavily interested in how the character of Sherlock Holmes has become part of the general pop culture psyche in a way that extends to only a handful of characters. When I first got into the hobby, my focus was pastiche, film and art, which were both signifiers and drivers of Sherlock Holmes growth and eventual iconography in pop culture. Film (incl. television and audio) is an extension of art (illustrative), comic books hit all kinds of buttons, and any spinoff writing, fiction or non-fiction, underground or mainstream, are indications of pop culture penetration and success. We’re sitting at over 130 years of interest in this character, and I daresay that the only earlier characters of English lit with as strong a reach into pop culture are King Arthur, Robin Hood and Frankenstein, although Sherlock Holmes’s near contemporaries like Dracula and Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde are right there alongside him. Holmes, and those others, are avatars of our modern mythology, replacing the gods of Greece and Rome. As a student of history, I'm aware that context is everything, so it's amazing to see Sherlock Holmes share as much genetic material with, say, King Arthur or Robin Hood, as he does with Batman, in the pop culture landscape, and that fascinates me.

Of course, there is also Arthur Conan Doyle's writing, which is delightful and both of and ahead of his time. It's a somewhat tired and tiresome comparison, but he really was the Stephen King of his day, and in some ways the J.K. Rowling, too, being a major celebrity, one of the highest paid genre authors, and publicly vocal on every matter under the sun. As the years pass, I'm more interested in Sherlock Holmes as part of my interest in Arthur Conan Doyle. As such, I never have nor will play 'The Game' in the traditional BSI sense. Watson as a writer is far less interesting to me than Doyle as a writer, or human being. 

Umm, no idea where I was going with all this, but clearly, it’s not one particular subset that interests me, as much as I like to tell myself that I’m largely just a collector of books.

What things do you like to research related to Sherlock Holmes?

Like to research? Nothing. Research is a necessary evil to me when required. As a collector, however, I do spend a good deal of time looking over bibliographies and tracking down details around early magazine appearances of both Sherlock Holmes and other Arthur Conan Doyle story appearances. I’m more interested in ACD’s life and what he was doing when writing the Sherlock Holmes stories than I am in Watson’s wandering war wound, or other canonical minutiae. So, I suppose that boils down to a preference of researching ACD, rather than Holmes.

In your previous life, you were a mystery bookstore owner, and now you are an editor (Both dream jobs for many Sherlockians!).  Which career do you think was more influential on your life in Sherlockiana?

Huh, now there’s an interesting question; one I’d never given any thought too previously. Looking at it now, it’s clear I’d never have got into editing if I hadn’t had a bookstore first. Opening up Mad for a Mystery was a direct result of my interest in Sherlock Holmes. I’d grown frustrated with the education program at the University of Calgary - yes, I had planned to be a teacher - and decided I’d drop out and open a bookstore instead of finishing my degree. This was the late 80s and mystery-themed specialty bookshops, like Otto’s The Mysterious Bookshop in NYC, seemed to be everywhere and all the rage… except for here in Calgary, so I figured it was a sure thing in an ‘if you build it, they will come’ sort of pipe dream.

I built it, but they mostly didn’t come, however, I  did sell some books to John Bennett Shaw via mail order, met Peter Wood, BSI (who would be responsible for my first invitation to the BSI dinner in 2003), turned down a book launch for Bradley & Sarjeants’s MS. HOLMES OF BAKER STREET, but did hold a launch for Beth Greenwood’s 1989 pastiche SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE THISTLE OF SCOTLAND, and I got to meet Kathleen I. Morrison, a local Calgarian who achieved media recognition in the 1940s as ‘The World’s First Lady Sherlockian’, so I learned a great deal.

While customers were infrequent visitors, publisher’s reps were not, and among them was Jeff Campbell, the regional rep for Berkley-Jove and Pocket Books. We hit it off, became friends (Jeff would later be Best Man at my wedding in 2006), and a little more than a decade later, when we were both out of the book trade, it was Jeff who suggested we put together a journal of Sherlockian pastiche, since he was developing skills as a writer and I was looking for a way to give back to the community that brought me so much joy. That journal idea, after soliciting stories via the Hounds-L email list and word of mouth, morphed into a couple small micro-press anthologies called CURIOUS INCIDENTS, which did remarkably well, each selling out a print run of 250 copies, in a matter of months, largely through direct online sales, although we got copies into mystery bookshops in New York and Seattle. I was rather proud of that since both Chris Roden (Calabash Press) and George Vanderburgh (The Battered Silicon Dispatch Box) told me at the time that print runs over 100 copies would leave me with boxes of books mouldering in my garage for years. 

A few years later, when my taste for horror fiction had largely overshadowed my Sherlockian interests, Jeff and I decided to take another swing at the cat, but this time, rather than traditional Sherlock Holmes pastiche, we decided on a solid horror-Holmes hybrid anthology. Instead of self-publishing we also decided to pitch to a Calgary-based publisher. We arranged a meeting with Brian Hades of EDGE SF&F, explained our angle, dropped the two volumes of CURIOUS INCIDENTS on the table and said we’d like to do the same, with a horror twist, but have you publish them. In 2008 we launched GASLIGHT GRIMOIRE: FANTASTIC TALES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES at the World Fantasy Convention, with stories by Barbara Hambly and Kim Newman bookending the collection, and have published three more in the series since then, plus a book of new Professor Challenger stories, and I found myself co-editing a book of Dupin stories for Titan books.  

Given all that, while my professional editing gig has had a tremendous impact in raising my profile within the Sherlockian community, my bookselling days are also, in my mind, inextricably tied to any success I’ve had either as a Sherlockian or professional editor.       

Anyone who follows you on social media knows about your growing collection of original Strand magazines.  How did that collection start?

My interest in collecting The Strand Magazine just sort of hit me in, of all places, The Strand bookshop in New York during a BSI weekend. For decades I’d been buying pastiche and every other new Sherlock Holmes-related book that came along, and most were neither worth my time or money. So, on that particular NYC visit to The Strand I stepped off the elevator on the third floor, and found myself staring at a copy of the large print first edition of ACD’s THE LOST WORLD, and immediately fell in love with it.

Ridiculously expensive, but less so than any copies available online, but I knew my wife would give me grief about it, plus I’m cheap, so I started scanning the shelves for other choices, and landed on three bound volumes of The Strand Magazine at $40 a pop. As I was paying for those Kris sidled up to me and said ‘If you really want it, go for it, just don’t expect any birthday or Christmas presents.’ So, I bought THE LOST WORLD, which I carried home in my luggage and had the three Strands shipped.

That shopping experience changed my approach to collecting. While I had about four bound Strands on the shelf since the late 80s, when those new additions arrived I suddenly realized I could have first editions, that preceded the first book editions, of all Sherlock Holmes stories except STUD and SIGN for considerably less than the cost of the collected book editions, have all the illustrations rather than the small selection reprinted in book editions, and I’d have an insight into everything popular, or going on the world, at the time they were written.

You can pick up all the Strand volumes published in Doyle’s lifetime for less (especially if you’re not fussy about them being in original bindings) than a fine UK first of THE HOUND, and we’re talking about 80 volumes in that run! For the first time in my Sherlockian collecting ‘career’ I actually hit on a finite collection goal, rather than the open-ended ‘I want it all’, vacuum-cleaner, John Bennett Shaw approach that I’d been half-assing at for decades.

In the 3-4 years since that NYC trip I’ve cut back on buying pastiches and even ‘writings-on-the-writings’ (all in both tracks limited to the work of friends, those with a solid track record, or featuring a subject I can’t resist), and my collection of The Strand Magazine has grown to nearly 60 of the 80 volumes published by Doyle’s death in 1930.  As a collector, now with a finish line, I’ve never been happier. 

What book would you recommend to other Sherlockians?

As a collector, I’m inclined to direct anyone towards A BIBLIOGRAPHY OF A. CONAN DOYLE by Green and Gibson. It’s invaluable for identifying first and early editions of ACD’s writings. As a pop culture enthusiast, FROM HOLMES TO SHERLOCK by Mattias Boström is a must read. As a student of the Victorian era, George MacDonald Fraser’s FLASHMAN, and the rest of the books in the series, receive my strongest recommendation, as you’ll never look at the Victorians, or the age, in quite the same way again, plus Holmes, Watson and Colonel Moran even turn up in one of the stories. Often, when asked about my favourite author, there’s a 50/50 chance I’ll say Fraser rather than Doyle. How’s that for an endorsement? 

Where do you see Sherlockiana in 5 or 10 years from now?

Pretty much the same place it is right now, give or take a level of popular enthusiasm driven by whatever is on film or television screens at the time. The level of general interest or enthusiasm is cyclical, but the level of iconography in pop culture remains constant, so it just depends on whether it’s the boom or bust stage that comes up when you spin the wheel in any given year. Since Sherlock Holmes, as a character, defines the term ‘detective’ in the public eye he’s a constant in our new pantheon of myths and so will always engender interest and devotees. I think the hobby will be doing just fine. 

Interesting Interview: Jerry Margolin

Jerry Margolin is the proud owner of the world's largest Sherlockian art collection.  He owns THOUSANDS of pieces ranging from original Pagets and Steeles to some you've never heard of.  If that were all he were known for, I would slap some pictures up here of his collection and we could all oooh and aaah over them.  

But I got to meet Jerry and his lovely wife Judy in Minnesota last year, and was immediately treated like an old friend.  Sure, we talked Sherlockiana, but I found the Margolins to be so friendly and garrulous, that we were soon rambling on and on about baseball, school, our kids, tattoos, you name it.  

There are living legends that you hear spoken of reverentially when you get into Sherlockiana, and Jerry Margolin is definitely on that list.  So when I first met the Margolins, I was expecting someone who knew he was a big deal and would be nice but brief with someone he didn't know, but what I found was a Sherlockian who has been in this hobby for a long time and still has the energy and love that can so often fade over time.  Jerry is extremely friendly and welcoming, and if you haven't met him yet, you are in for a treat with this week's interview.

How do you define the word “Sherlockian”?

I would have said there is an easy answer to that question back when I started collecting Holmes books. I would have just said someone who reads all the stories over and over to digest every little detail. Over the years though, Sherlockians have diversified so much that there is no one way to describe that term. Describing myself, I am not a scholar, I know my general facts, but I do not get into the minutiae. I enjoy reading that information from others and I had all the books of chronology and detailed discussions, but I am a collector. There are so many other directions people can go such as film, books, and details within the stories. Basically, anyone with any type of deep interest in any part of Holmes and/or the stories can be called a Sherlockian.

How did you become a Sherlockian?

Well, the easy answer is the cliched answer people have heard over and over. My brother is four years older than me and he was always a reader, in fact he is now a best selling author. When I was 10 years old he gave me the Complete Sherlock Holmes and told me to start reading. I was hooked pretty quickly after reading some of the stories, especially The Hound, which at 10 years old was pretty scary. My association with Holmes really picked up on my honeymoon, we went to London and after landing, going to the hotel, the first thing we did was to walk to Baker Street. I also bought the first books for what was to become a massive Holmes book collection. So this was where my interest in Holmes and collecting collided. After that, a few  years later, I met my mentor in all things book collecting related, Norman Nolan, BSI. He basically taught me what I know about book collecting and he invited me to my first BSI dinner as his guest in 1974. This was the moment my interest in being a Sherlockian was solidified.

What is your favorite canonical story?

My favorite story has almost always been “Thor Bridge”. Besides the story itself, it contains several classic things we all know such as the mention of the tin dispatch box labeled “John H. Watson, MD” which consisted of manuscripts of as yet unpublished stories. A couple mentions are those of Mr. James Philimore who stepped back inside his house was never seen again. Also, there is Isadora Person and the remarkable worm unknown to science. Another classic in this story is Holmes’ thoughts on his fee, “My fees are upon a fixed scale, save when I remit them altogether”. 

As to the story, I have always liked how Holmes figures out how Neil Gibson’s wife dies, clearing Grace Dunbar. His discovery of the gun on the string was uniquely a Holmes deduction. As an aside, my first original Frederic Dorr Steele added to my collection was of Holmes seated at a table speaking with Neil Gibson. 

Who is a specific Sherlockian that you think others would find interesting?

Les Klinger is the person I would name as someone Sherlockians would find interesting. First, the volume of work he has put out, both Sherlockian and non-Sherlockian, is enormous. I have known Les for many years and I still can’t figure out how he has stretched the normal day to more than 24 hours. Of course, first and foremost would be his incredible new take on The Annotated Sherlock Holmes. If you have even a small amount of interest in Holmes, this is a must have on your shelf. He is also an interesting speaker on many topics. His other works on subjects such as Dracula, Frankenstein, Sandman, and so many others are worth researching. Les’s depth of knowledge on so many subjects would make him the perfect person for anyone to get to know better. 

What subset of Sherlockiana really interests you?

In my earlier book collecting days when building my Holmes rare book collection, what really interested me were early works in dust jackets. In the early 1900’s dust jackets were considered a nuisance and thrown away which I think is a crime. Some were beautiful with incredible artwork. As any collector knows, a dust jacket on an early rare book can be 50% of the value of the book. One great example for Sherlockians is the first edition of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes 1892. There is only one in existence in jacket and I have had the great pleasure of holding it in my hands. I find it terribly sad that these pieces of paper which sometimes added excitement to the moment just before you open the book to read the first page have been discarded.

What things do you like to research related to Sherlock Holmes?

Anyone who knows me or have heard about my art collection, would not be shocked to find out that my favorite subject to research is artwork in Sherlockiana. When I find a piece of art that interests me, not necessarily by a famous artist, it sets me on the trail to track down and get in touch with this person to try and arrange to buy the original artwork. Fortunately, I have been quite successful at this. It does not always work out, but as with my book collecting days, the hunt was everything, the excitement of finding the information needed to obtain the piece can be almost as exciting as finally hanging the piece on my wall.

How did you become a Sherlockian art collector?

This is a pretty easy question to answer. I was born a collector, my mother was an antiques collector and dealer. I collected everything as a kid, comics, baseball cards, etc. As I began to collect Holmes rare books, I would from time to time come across Sherlock Holmes art that, at that time, was pretty inexpensive so I would buy it. As my book collection grew, I began to seek out a few more pieces of art. In those early days of the 70’s and 80’s comic artists just gave their art away. After it was used to print the comic or book, they had no further use for it. I started calling and writing (yes real letters) to these people and asking for their art. All they said to me was, what is your address and it arrived days later in the mail. I was able to acquire quite a bit of amazing artwork by some incredibly well-known artists. 

After I sold my book collection, I found that after removing all the bookcases, I had a lot of wall space to fill and the art collection exploded all over my home to the tune of some 4,000 pieces both on the walls and in portfolio books. Sadly, later into the 90’s, artists discovered that their work was valuable and my gravy train of free art was over. Needless to say, having to pay for the art now has not stopped me, sometimes much to my wife’s dismay. 

What is the most interesting or obscure piece in your collection?

This particular question is not an easy one since I have so many unique items in the art collection. I would say there are four pieces in particular that I can mention. First and foremost would be my original Sidney Paget from “The Resident Patient”. I have owned since the 80’s when I acquired it. To this day, every time I see it, it still hits me that I actually own one of only about 30 originals in existence. 

The next would be a drawing from 1896 by artist Peter Newell which he drew for John Kendrick Bangs “Pursuit of the Houseboat”. It is one of only two drawings in the book that shows Holmes. It is signed and dated by Newell in 1896. The book was published in 1897.

The next would be, though not Sherlockian, a drawing by Sir Arthur’s father Charles Doyle which shows in it the fairies which was so appealing to Sir Arthur. 

Along with this, also not Sherlockian, is a doodle by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle which is signed with his initials on the back. Both of these last two hang side by side on the wall. 

What book would you recommend to other Sherlockians?

The books I would recommend are a bit tough to find, but well worth the hunt. They are a set of history books about the Baker Street Irregulars , not the street urchins from the stories, but the organization. The author of these books is Jon Lellenberg and are some of the best Sherlockian reading I have done in my years as a person interested in Holmes. All the information found in these books are fascinating. Jon did a great job laying out the history of the BSI from the 30’s to the 60’s. If you know someone who has them that might be borrowed or if you can seek them out on book selling platforms, it is so worth the hunt. 

Where do you see Sherlockiana in 5 or 10 years from now?

I am sincerely hoping that through the recent spate of films and tv shows using Holmes in different characterizations from the BBC series, Elementary, to Miss Sherlock,  will lead younger people back to reading the original stories. If that can happen then interest in Sherlock will continue.

As others have stated before me, the upside to this pandemic is the advent of the Zoom meetings where people from all walks can join in and speak to and hear from older long time Sherlockians and mix their ideas and thoughts across many countries. I have met many new people I would not have ever had the chance to meet without these online get togethers.

I believe there is great hope for interest in Holmes to continue far into the future.

That is Martha [LAST]

Martha Hudson does not exist in the Canon.  Because of Vincent Starrett's essay "The Singular Adventure of Martha Hudson," Sherlockians have taken to heart that an imaginary character can be created from three very different ones: a reliable landlady, a gossipy housekeeper, and a quiet spy.

The name 'Martha' is only used in "His Last Bow."  She is the only servant left at Von Bork's mansion on the night that the story takes place.  While the German agent is showing off to his comrade, Baron Von Herling, the dear old ruddy-faced woman, accompanied by her cat, was bent over her knitting in a different room.  As far as Von Bork was concerned, the old lady's self absorption and sleepiness personified Britannia.  

We later learn that Martha has been placed in Von Bork's mansion by Holmes himself and that night signaled Holmes and Watson to arrive at the mansion only after the Baron has left when Holmes could capture the spy without incident.  This spy cannot be the Baker Street landlady.

Sure, Mrs. Hudson was helpful by turning the wax dummy of Holmes in "The Empty House," but the woman who had to be instructed to crawl so she wouldn't be seen is now the one privy to Holmes's plans and is making judgments on whether or not he should arrive with the Baron in the house?  Mrs. Hudson, a woman who was excited to find a revolver bullet in the carpet of Baker Street has grown into someone who monitors letters written by spies?  No, it will hardly do.

"But," some would say, "maybe the landlady grew tired of her digs in London and wanted a life of adventure?"

Sure, people long for adventure, but as D. Martin Dakin points out in A Sherlock Holmes Commentary, this theory will not hold water merely for the fact that Holmes addresses the woman in LAST by her first name.  "Victorian formality of speech ruled out the use of Christian names for anyone but members of the family (like Mycroft), children (like Jack Ferguson) or servants (like Billy the page or John in 'The Man With the Twisted Lip').  Watson was Holmes's most intimate friend, to whom he was deeply devoted, yet never in all their years together does he call him anything but 'Watson', except when he is 'Doctor' or some similar phrase.  It is incredible that he would have been so guilty of such familiarity with the landlady whom, we are told, he had always treated with such gentleness and courtesy."

But the Mandela effect can be strong, so let me offer one more piece of evidence to prove that 'Martha' is not 'Mrs. Hudson.'  At the end of EMPT, Holmes is checking in with Mrs. Hudson and shows concern for her well being (“I hope you preserved all precautions, Mrs. Hudson?”), praise for a small task (“Excellent. You carried the thing out very well."), and then a curt dismissal as she is no longer needed for the case at hand ("All right, Mrs. Hudson, I am much obliged for your assistance.").

Holmes's interactions with Martha are quite different.  He describes her to Watson as someone "who has played her part to admiration."  When she arrives, Holmes says, "Ah, Martha, you will be glad to hear that all is well.”  She shows knowledge of the mission as she tells Holmes that she could not have left the previous night when Von Bork wanted her to accompany his wife, because "that would hardly have suited your plans."  And, although Holmes dismisses her in his typically curt manner, he makes arrangements to meet with her the following day at Claridge's Hotel back in London.  No, Martha was not an old friend whom Holmes asked to help him out.  This was a trained agent that Sherlock Holmes trusted to carry out a role and to make decisions that would allow him to achieve his goal of capturing a German spy.

So let go of those fantasies of the nice landlady that doubles as an international spy.  Martha and Mrs. Hudson are two different people.  Plus, Sherlock Holmes's landlady never owned a cat.

Interesting Interview: Jacquelynn Morris

Jacquelynn Morris is one of those rare people who are welcoming and fiery at the same time.  She's one of those Sherlockians who isn't clamoring to do everything everywhere, but when she flexes her canonical muscles, you realize you're in the presence of a keystone in our hobby.  She started Scintillation of Scions, has contributed to plenty of Sherlockian anthologies, is on the Board of Advisors for Sherlockian.net, and probably a million other things I don't know about because Jacquelynn is not one to toot her own horn.  In fact when I invited her to be interviewed, she said she probably wouldn't have much to say... you be the judge of that.

How do you define the word “Sherlockian”?

I’m not sure that I can. When I first became active in the Sherlockian community the word was understood to mean those whose pastime was reading, writing, and discussing the Canon as written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Since 2009/2010, when the first Robert Downey, Jr. “Sherlock Holmes” film was released and the first season of BBC Sherlock was introduced in the UK, there was a period of enlightenment where people who had never read one of the stories took a sudden interest in Holmes and Watson as presented onscreen. 

Luckily, many liked the characters so much that they became absorbed in the source material of the original stories. Many of those newly-besotted became aficionados in their own way, bringing fresh perspectives and sparking lively discussions while also appreciating—and eventually participating in—more scholarly and traditional pursuits in the community. The definition of “Sherlockian” became more fluid than it had previously, and though there was an adjustment period I feel we have all reaped the benefits of a resurgence of interest in our favorite consulting detective.

How did you become a Sherlockian?

I was a great fan of the stories back when I was around 11 or 12 years old, but had no understanding of the existence of the literary community until many, many years later. It wasn’t until around 1994 or so when my brother and sister-in-law recommended the Granada Jeremy Brett series that I rediscovered Holmes. From there it was a complete immersion back into the stories again, while at the same time I became involved in other mystery fiction. Then I joined AOL with the screen name “Sherlockia” (which I had intended to be “Sherlockian,” but AOL limited names to 10 characters), found what was then the Mystery Fiction Forum, and my life would never be the same.

One of my first searches in AOL’s Mystery Fiction Forum was for anything Sherlock Holmes related. There was a Sunday evening chat, “The Scandalous Bohemians,” where each week’s chat focused on one of the canonical stories. There were questions for discussion among the small group of participants and the chat hosts, which included my now long-time friend, Regina Stinson. It was through Regina, who had long been involved in all things Sherlockian, that I first found out about the international community of Holmes aficionados, including the existence of scion societies. Before long I was entrenched in the AOL Mystery Fiction Forum, became a volunteer there, and was assigned the “Hardboiled Mysteries” message board as monitor, moderator, and discussion-starter. On the message board I met a great number of mystery writers who posted regularly; among them future BSIs-to-be Jan Burke, Dana Cameron, and my BSI classmate of 2014, SJ Rozan.

To wrap up this exceedingly long answer to your simple question, I’ll just say that through mystery fiction on AOL I began attending fan-run mystery conventions, where I met Debbie Clark, member of Watson’s Tin Box, who invited me to a meeting. Within two years I was the group’s Gasogene (president) for a year. It was all downhill from there!

What is your favorite canonical story? 

Had you asked me this prior to 2014, I might have answered differently, but since my BSI Investiture is “The Lion’s Mane” I would have to choose that story. When Chris Redmond asked me to contribute to his About Sixty anthology I requested it, to which he graciously agreed. Should you pick up a copy of ABOUT SIXTY you’ll read my defense of that story as the best of them all (Hint: Some of my defense involves it being one of only two of the 56 short stories and 4 novels that is narrated by Holmes himself).  

Who is a specific Sherlockian that you think others would find interesting?

Among my Sherlockian friends whom I am privileged to know, I would say that one of the most interesting is Bonnie MacBird, whom I first met in 2012 through our common interest in saving Undershaw, Arthur Conan Doyle’s former home in the UK. 

Bonnie is the author of three (so far) Sherlock Holmes pastiches: ART IN THE BLOOD, UNQUIET SPIRITS, and THE DEVIL’S DUE (in addition, she has contributed to a number of Sherlockian publications). She has a fascinating history—she wrote the original screenplay for the movie TRON, won three Emmy Awards for documentary writing/producing, she’s a playwright and director, and teaches acting. 

Time spent with Bonnie is always a delight; I’ve had the pleasure of her company at many Sherlockian events over the years, and even once had a lovely tea at her flat in London. She knows a great deal about many, many things, and is a charming and thoughtful conversationalist. Discussing Holmes with Bonnie is a special treat—I hope you have an opportunity to meet her sometime.

What subset of Sherlockiana really interests you?

Oh, there are so many subsets! There are the collectors of books, the collectors of ephemera, people with careers in science and medicine which add so much to our understanding of Canon, writers, artists, curators, sewists of historical garb, historians, archivists, tobacco experts, creators of authentic 221b sitting rooms, experts on the history of the BSI and individuals who added to the hobby throughout its history—it is an embarrassment of riches. Just about any direction one finds to go in our interest in and study of anything related to Canon, there will be fellow travelers. I love the variety, and so have not fixed on any one subset. 

What things do you like to research related to Sherlock Holmes?

I enjoy finding an angle in a story that may not have caught anyone else’s attention, then researching that angle to prove or disprove my own theory about it. As an example, when I was asked to contribute to the BSI Manuscript Series for The Wrong Passage (“The Golden Pince-Nez”) regarding the poison Anna Coram used, the angle I found was that though it is assumed by nearly everyone that Anna died from the poison the story never says that she did. Through researching poisons available at the time and consulting with experts of my acquaintance I was able to support my theory and propose what poison it had to have been. I love research, even when it doesn’t prove what I want it to!

You've been involved with Scintillation of Scions since the beginning.  How did it come about and what are some of your favorite memories from it?

Scintillation sprang nearly fully-formed from my head during a road trip in early 2008; with the support of Watson’s Tin Box and Peter Blau’s blessing we held the first Scintillation in August 2008. My favorite memory is of that very first event, when we had no money, no one knew who or what we were, I sucked at delegating and tried to do too much myself (bad plan), but, as the years following would continue to prove, Sherlockians are generous and hard-working and will step up to offer to help. That first time was when I saw my vision take on shape and form through the efforts of kindred spirits who shared that vision. It would all have been a terrible flop if not for Watson’s Tin Box, Andy Solberg, Peter Blau, Bill Hyder, Art Renkwitz, Denny Dobry, John Sherwood, Regina Stinson, Joel and Karen Ballard, and the late Paul Churchill, who believed in me.

The vision I had for Scintillation (the name, by the way, was created by Tin Boxer Debbie Clark, as a collective noun, “A Scintillation of Scions”) was to have a Sherlockian “family reunion” for the East Coast aside from BSI Weekend. I imagined a one-track symposium, an afternoon tea, and time for people to socialize and get to know people from other scions. Before we knew it, Scintillation had become known across the country with upwards of 100 attendees (deliberately capped at that number by me, as my vision was not for an all-out convention but for an intimate gathering of kindred spirits). The first couple of years we had to find speakers, but from then on well-known Sherlockians were asking us if they could speak! After ten years of organizing the event, with the help and hard work of an exceptional committee, I decided that it was time for another person’s vision, new ideas, different directions, so Scintillation X was my last, and Karen Wilson has quite successfully taken the reins. The committee stayed on with her and Greg Ruby, with his year's of event planning, came on board. I am exceedingly proud of every one of the Scintillation team!

And speaking of conferences, I first got to meet you at Holmes, Doyle, and Friends back in 2018 where you gave an enlightening talk on the importance of tea in the Canon.  What types of teas do you think Holmes and Watson would prefer?

Interesting question! We know they drink coffee as it’s mentioned in the Canon, but as for tea I would imagine they would enjoy a strong black tea in the afternoon. I see for Holmes and Watson a good Earl Grey, like Kusmi Tea’s Anastasia (my personal favorite), or Fortnum & Mason’s Smoky Earl Grey (named after Charles, the second Earl Grey, not to be confused with the British actor, Charles Gray, who was Granada’s Mycroft). 

Though these particular blends would have to be sent back to 1895 via a time machine, surely their equivalents were available through different tea vendors in their London. As Earl Grey tea is not traditionally served with milk, neither Holmes nor Watson would muddy the distinct flavor of the bergamot in the tea. Rather, I would expect Holmes to drink his tea straight and Watson to add a bit of sugar or honey and, if Mrs. Hudson was so inclined, a slice of lemon for his cup.  

What book would you recommend to other Sherlockians?

I have not only recommended it, but I’ve bought copies (8 copies so far, according to Amazon) as gifts of Steve Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes for Dummies. It’s a perfect introduction for new Sherlockians and a valuable resource for the rest of us. I find myself going back to it regularly for information or to refresh my own memory. It really is a great book!

Where do you see Sherlockiana in 5 or 10 years from now? 

In 5 years’ time I expect that we will all be settled into our particular avenues of interest while continuing to encourage others to discover Holmes and Watson. I’ve been told by those with a longer history in the hobby than myself that there is a resurgence of interest every 15 years or so; there was one during the Jeremy Brett years, then the Robert Downey, Jr. films and BBC Sherlock, which we are still experiencing. 

I hope that should I still be above ground 10 years from now perhaps we might be fortunate to have adaptations more aligned with Canon with regard to the stories, as Granada once attempted to do. More diversity in actors and even settings would be optimal; it is the stories with those characters and their unique friendship that caught us up in all of this to begin with. I would love to see Doyle’s stories on screen, loyal to the originals, the plots minimally altered and adapted as time and budget would permit. (I might discourage a showrunner/producer from putting The Mazarin Stone on screen--no one needs that!) 

Interesting Interview: Mike McSwiggin

Oh, are you in for a treat today!  If you've been to a Sherlockian event in the past few years, this guy probably looks familiar.  And if you've been lucky enough to meet him, you know a fun batch of answers is coming up.  Mike McSwiggin is a low-key guy, but once you meet him he is a Sherlockian that you always want to talk to.  Self-deprecating, funny, and wildly knowledgeable, Mike is one of the most easy-going Sherlockians around and so great to spend time with.  But don't take my word for it; see for yourself in Mike's Interesting Interview:

How do you define the word “Sherlockian”?

Well, the easy answer is to say someone who dissects the Holmes stories and devours the writings about the writings.  But to be honest, the deeper I get into the Sherlockian world, the more I realize that isn’t always the most accurate picture.  For some people, sure: they can quote the Canon like some invoke scripture.  And some seem to have read every theory about every idiosyncrasy ever published in a Sherlockian journal. 

But others have little interest in the writings about the writings.  Some obsess over every film adaptation.  And others collect one type (or many types) of Sherlock Holmes bauble.  I think it really boils down to two traits: a Sherlockian loves Sherlock Holmes and enjoys being around other people who love Sherlock Holmes.  Where you fall in the spectrum doesn’t really matter.  And, frankly, if we all had the same background and the same interests, we would be a boring group of people who probably would just irritate each other.

How did you become a Sherlockian?

I read the stories fairly early in school.  I came across Baring-Gould’s Annotated in the public library and I went from being a fan to becoming an addict.  As an adult, I went to some Sherlockian events, and enjoyed them all.  But it wasn’t until my friendship with the late Paul Herbert (founder of Cincinnati’s Tankerville Club and walking encyclopedia of Sherlockian knowledge) that I truly understood anything about the Sherlockian world or what I might add to it.    

What is your favorite canonical story?

It changes frequently, depending on my mood.  For the moment, I’ll say HOUN.  There is so much right with this story, and the atmosphere cannot be topped.  Being a novella rather than a short story allows that atmosphere to build.  But unlike STUD or SIGN, the story remains linear. 

And while some knock the story for having less Holmes, I think the proportion of Watson to Holmes makes sense, given the relationships and perspectives that needed to be built.  I seem to find at least one new aspect to enjoy with each re-reading.  My latest little nugget: bitterns are secretive birds.  Who knew?  I have no idea what makes a bird secretive, but I like knowing that the bird mentioned in the story has its secrets.

Who is a specific Sherlockian that you think others would find interesting?

Ross Davies.  Ross is one of the most interesting people I’ve ever met, Sherlockian or otherwise.  He gives some of the most compelling speeches and presentations I’ve ever seen.  Whether speaking about World War I, the history of portraiture, or bobbleheads (I’ve seen him espouse upon all three), he knows how to tell a compelling story. 

And that makes sense, as Ross is a law school professor.  He edits & publishes The Green Bag, a law journal that finds great excuses for working in Sherlock Holmes and Nero Wolfe quite regularly.  He now also edits & publishes The Baker Street Almanac, a great resource for Sherlockians (despite having things I wrote in there). 

If you are on the fence about going to a conference, and you see Ross will be speaking, you should go.  And then do yourself the favor and get up the nerve to speak to him afterward.  I did, and I have been joyfully paying the price ever since.

What subset of Sherlockiana really interests you?

Well, Rob, as you had me confess it in a book you co-edited, I am a chronologist.  I like reading about the lines of reasoning others have had in trying to date the stories.  And then I enjoy crafting my own answers. 

For those who haven’t been exposed to this deviancy, know that the stories as they are written pose some problems with the dates as given by Watson.  Chronologists seek to divine the actual dates for the cases.  Chronology is the red-headed stepchild of the Sherlockian world.  I actually told someone at an event that I was a chronologist, and he unconsciously took a step backward.  Next time I see him, I’m going to tell him I am also a pickpocket.  I wonder if he will back up more or become relaxed?  

What things do you like to research related to Sherlock Holmes?

Well, apart from the chronology stuff, I really enjoy crafting insane Sherlockian quiz questions.  Paul Herbert was infamous for his maniacally difficult quiz questions at the Tankerville Club.  While I don’t like an entire quiz to be made up with those kinds of questions, a few of them peppered among the normal stuff can be fun. 

The key is to not limit yourself to information only found in the story.  That provides two benefits: it gives you a wider field of play and ruffles the feathers of people who want things to be boring.  Here is an example from a quiz I did for BLUE: 

Apart from its meaning in the story (which is a type of cap), a Scotch bonnet may also refer to which of the following (circle all that apply):

A:)  a variety of chili pepper

B:)  a fairy ring mushroom

C:)  the official state shell of North Carolina

D:)  an island in Lake Ontario

And the answer is, in fact, all four choices.

As a student of chronology, do you think there will ever be a timeline of the Canon that everyone can agree on?

Absolutely not.  The average Sherlockian just won’t care.  And that diseased subset of Sherlockians called chronologists – we’ll just continue to fight.  Watson, through a combination of purposeful obfuscation and general poor note-taking, left us a real Gordian knot.  But that’s the fun of it.  If someone could devise a unified field theory for this stuff, it probably would have happened already. 

And we would instead be arguing about why so many birds are mentioned in the Canon.

What is a piece of Sherlockian scholarship that you think every Sherlockian should read?

I love D. Martin Dakin’s A Sherlock Holmes Commentary, from 1972.  It is the total package:  it is extremely well-written, the facts cited are correct (I won’t name names here, but there are some works of scholarship with some factual errors – likely due to small or non-existent editing budgets), each chapter represents a different story, there are so many great discussion topics for each case, and each chapter starts off with affixing a date to the given case! 

Dakin does a fantastic job of explaining how he decided on each date.  But don’t be frightened off, as the chronology discussion is just one facet of each chapter.  You do not need to care about chronology at all to get a lot out of this book.  Yes, it is out of print (like so many books of Sherlockian scholarship).  But you can pick up a decent reading copy for well under $20.  And short of an omnibus of the 60 stories itself, you will be hard-pressed to get a better value for your Sherlockian dollar.

What book would you recommend to other Sherlockians?

If they have never read any Nero Wolfe stories by Rex Stout, I like to recommend Too Many Cooks, which is one of my favorites.  I am as much a Wolfean as I am a Sherlockian, and so like to cheer for the other team whenever I can.  Stout’s Wolfe stories are so well-done and under-appreciated.  Chandler seems to get all of the accolades for mid-twentieth century mystery writers (and, hell, I love his books as well).  But Stout took all of that pithiness and added a great sense of humor.

If they HAVE read Stout, I like to recommend Steve Hockensmith.  His “Holmes on the Range” stories featuring brothers Big Red and Old Red are fantastic.  Great writing paired with great humor.  I tend to despise westerns, so for me to recommend anything that could be remotely construed as a western is saying something.

Where do you see Sherlockiana in 5 or 10 years from now?

I am making a conscious decision to answer this as optimistically as I can.  I hope we are able to build upon the influx of younger Sherlockians in the last few years.  Maybe they came for Cumberbatch, but stayed for the surprisingly fun literary discussion. 

And in addition to the younger people, I hope we are able to reach more people of diverse backgrounds.  Different countries, different socio-economic groups, different ethnic backgrounds.  One of the few positives of this pandemic is attending online Sherlockian meetings and events with people from all over the country (and world).  I have really enjoyed hearing discussions with voices unfamiliar to me. 

And I love hearing newly minted devotees of Holmes and Watson speak passionately about our shared hobby.  Their excitement is infectious.  If a Sherlockian event was full of people all with the same opinions, the same perspective, that would be brutally dull.

I just inadvertently came full circle to my answer to your first question, which means I probably should stop and pretend that I planned any of this out.