here is the beginning of the comic. I still haven't drawn the cover. Also, I don't know yet if my next pages are considered obscene enough to be restricted by tmblr
What do you think, should I overlay this mosaic like on the last page?
some of you have already seen these pages. there will be a continuation on twitter sometime on tuesday, but here I need to post all the old pages, but I don't want to post them all at once. so I will post them in 2 pieces so that I have spare pages. if I don't have time to draw the spare pages, i.e. on tumblr it will be like on twitter, then a collapse will occur and time will go by quickly. at least for me😅.
I came up with something else instead of a mosaic.
Late to the party but here’s my submission for @shco-shta-fanzine!! It’s been so wonderful participating in the fanzine and witnessing its making - the immense love for the games and the support from the community have made my first fanzine experience absolutely amazing. Please check out the full zine and everyone’s great work!!
I just wanted to let anyone know who would be interested - I worked on the charachter designs on Hearth & Holmes, a game currently in development by @abigailmoment !
If your curiosity is peaked, you can play the demo, and wishlist it on steam!
You are John Watson. You're very worried about your best friend, Sherlock Holmes. You're right to be worried. Left to his own devices, he'll
Mycroft loved his mother. He loved her so fucking much. Hell, it was because of that love that he put up with Richter’s shit for as long as he did, because he wanted to believe that she might get better, that he and Sherlock (ESPECIALLY Sherlock) might have their mother back.
He took it upon himself to oversee her treatment, hiring a psychiatrist and relocating to a beautiful Mediterranean island so she could have some peace and quiet. A change of scenery far away from the prying eyes of those who had known them in London. He took her out of the place where she'd lost the love of her life and suffered greatly because of it.
“I always wanted such a nice pond in London. It looks so peaceful.”
“Mycroft knew you would like it.”
He knew exactly what she liked and provided it. He knew how much she'd wanted a pond in London and gave her one in Cordona. I can only imagine how many other things Violet had wished for, which he made possible with the advantage of moving to a new home in a new location. The Cabinet of Curiosities is one that comes to mind..
He didn’t let her suffer the public humiliation and stigma of mental illness. He went out of his way to keep it a secret so she could take her time and recuperate in the privacy of her own home, no doubt employing all his resources and connections to smother any spark of gossip before it even started.
He never thought of abandoning her until she became a serious threat to Sherlock.
The sheer protectiveness in his confrontation with Richter, “I’m not letting you anywhere near my mother again,” breaks my heart. Even after being pushed to the brink and seeing with his own eyes how much worse she'd gotten, he still hoped to fix things and help her get better..
I’ve thought long and hard about the moment he said, “She must be sent to a legitimate medical facility,” and I really don’t think he was sugarcoating the word “asylum” here. He'd already chosen in-home care over committing her to indignity. He witnessed Richter’s charlatan methods. He knew that what awaited her in asylums would have been even worse. When he said “legitimate medical facility,” I believe he meant it literally. With his high position in the government and generational wealth, he could have arranged for exclusive medical care far removed from any traditional psychiatric institution at the time to ensure his mother received the best and most humane treatment possible, because he now had a solid example of what INHUMANE treatment looked and sounded like.
He'd been going the extra mile for her and Sherlock almost all his life. This would have been just another stretch of the road for him, but for better or worse, it was never meant to be.
Even after her death, he still honored her memory. A single word to Yasmin Sertel and the Chronicle would publish the most beautiful and celebratory of obituaries despite all the harsh realities behind closed doors. He made sure the world remembered her brilliance, charm, and sense of humor, not the mental illness that had consumed her. Most importantly, he made sure that she remained in the loving memory of Sherlock. Her baby boy.
He did his best to have her positively remembered by everyone else, except maybe by himself.
The way he speaks of her years later stands out to me when it's compared to Sherlock. It’s always “her” or “she,” rarely, if ever, “mother” or “our mother” except for that one time in his letter to Sherlock “One presumes by now you have visited our mother’s final resting place” and even that feels distant and formal..
“Your are YOUR mother’s son” I can’t help but read detachment here. He’s acknowledging Sherlock’s closer bond with her while at the same time distancing himself from his own identity as her son. The way he said “SHE did this to you” also betrays his internalized resentment.
Her attempt to drown his brother, her own child, (IN THE VERY SAME POND MYCROFT HAD GIFTED HER I MUST STRESS), was a grave personal betrayal that I don’t think Mycroft will ever fully recover from.
He keeps reminding Sherlock to consider the bigger picture of her death and Richter’s malpractice, but I think Mycroft himself struggles to do the same when it comes to that moment. He blames Richter’s treatment, but he can’t separate her final act from the mother he loved.
Selling all her possessions and keeping nothing feels like a visceral, almost misguided reaction to that betrayal. It’s as if he didn’t want any reminders of her to stay. Heirlooms like her pocket watch went to strangers and vultures instead of their rightful heirs, which is just... sad. At least he sold them to the highest bidders, which hopefully made more than enough money to fund Sherlock’s education and upbringing. And I like to think he let Sherlock keep a few things because he knew better than anyone just how much he still loved her, even if Mycroft lost some of his own love and respect for her. (My personal canon is that the locket thing Sherlock wears on his wrist used to belong to Violet)
It’s much harder for Mycroft to reconcile the loving mother of his childhood with the detached, abusive woman she became. He never had a Jon to help him cope and filter out the pain, so the aweful memories linger and sting. Even in very rare moments when he tried to bridge the gap (*cough* preparing for the play *cough*), Violet rejected him. However well-meaning that rejection may have been (prioritizing her youngest), coming from her of all people seriously hurt him.
Sherlock was at least able to find joy and make some happy memories in Cordona, but for Mycroft, that entire year was a bleak and dark chapter in his life. I can't blame him for wanting to leave it behind as quickly as possible or for resenting it, especially the parts about his mother.
The love we feel for someone becomes overshadowed by the hurt they caused, even if it was unintentional. The heartbreaking irony here is that Mycroft is now on the other end of this stick. Sherlock is unable to look past the fact that he lied to him, unable to see his good intentions or lifelong sacrifices. Much like Mycroft with Violet, Sherlock also clings to resentment. Talk about generational dysfunction..
To Sherlock, Mycroft’s avoidance coping looks like cold-heartedness. It makes it seem as though he didn’t care about their mother, and the moment she died, he packed up and left dragging Sherlock along like he'd been finally relieved of the burden of caring for her, when in reality, what happened was traumatic for Mycroft, too.
Especially because Mycroft loved him and loved his mother, so very deeply and in his own selfless, thankless, and practical ways.
Some philosophical discussion, or just wildly wandering thoughts of mine, on SHCO and SHTA. Long and...potentially boring...or intriguing, depending on the reader themselves.
Warning: Contains spoilers.
Also warning: If you are the kind of people be like "the bad guy is wrong and immoral so everything they say or think has no merit whatsoever", please please don't open it.
I have long been thinking about writing something about the dialogue in the gallery between Sherlock and Vogel in SHCO, and now after finishing SHTA remake, I realize this new game paints a clearer picture of the philosophical implications of this new FW Sherlock Holmes series, so I can explore it a bit more.
First, a point to make: in both games, the antagonists are correct, in a way. Yes, they are manipulative, immoral, even blatantly cruel and crazy; and no, I am not saying they did something right. But examining only the logical and philosophical aspects of the stories, they both got something right, some core understanding of the world, no less.
In Vogel's case, it is the power and role of human emotions and the absurdity of the notion of truth. In the gallery and the party, he makes it clear that feelings are powerful and irresistible; human rationality is no match for feelings and emotions; everything that matters is what we feel. He also insists that truth is more than what you simply observe; the consequence and influence are part of the truth, which makes "truth", in a way, a matter of interpretation and choice rather than ironclad objectivity.
And he has a very brilliant point there. The social implications of truth and which aspects we choose to reveal or emphasize can not be understated. Moreover, knowing the limit of human rationality is the first step towards real reasoning and a better world. The arrogance of believing everything is rational or reasonable always leads to disasters and the worst form of irrationality.
Then Vogel's view goes this way: the notion of pursuing truth is but an illusion, and it could be undesirable and destructive. We see that too at the endings of SHCO. Even after finishing the story, there is still no absolute truth about Violet's death, which is partly open to Sherlock's (or the player's) own interpretation. He has nothing to say to reproach Vogel's remarks. He says Vogel is lying, but that only addresses the man's motive, not his argument itself.
As for Rochester, at first glance, he shares very few similarities with Vogel: he is a much, much worse man and makes less sense than Vogel. Vogel, at his worst, is to prove himself right by manipulating Sherlock and inflicting pain on him (and you can't deny that he does help Sherlock, intentional or not, to find the truth, which is what Sherlock desires), but Rochester is utmost destructive, a mass murderer, trying to bring an end to the world.
But Rochester, as mad and evil as he is, also grasps some level of truth about the world, about the ancient gods.
The game is amazingly vague about if all the Cthulhu business is real or merely Sherlock's hallucination and the result of cultists' manipulation. But comparing the remake with the original game, one thing is clear: there are more "magical" or supernatural elements in the new one--the mysterious mind-controlling Khaleid lenses, the increasing storms, the things Sherlock sees and experiences...if they are not entirely created by some ancient gods and their worshipers, at least on thing is clear: there are much more mysteries that science cannot decipher exists in this world.
More importantly, in the very end, Rochester makes Sherlock admit that everything he has seen is real. The horrifying legends and lurking danger of an ancient entity truly exist, not pure madness and hallucination, not the effect of drugs. In my opinion, this is more significant than the argument of "if Cthulhu really exists". It's all about Sherlock and his interpretation of the world, reality and sanity. And here, during the confrontation, he starts to doubt it all. In this way, he proves Rochester right--there is no such thing as sanity. Ironically, at this point, between the two, Rochester is the sane one--if sanity is to distinguish false and true, to face and accept reality, and insanity entails denying reality, indulging in delusions and false beliefs that fail to align with the real world, then Sherlock is the one who truly has gone mad.
It sounds absurd at this point--at the end of both games, Sherlock is proved to be wrong to an extent, his rationality tested, belief questioned, and sanity shattered. It seems he has failed in his own pursuit, yet he still persists and fights back--but on what ground? If the antagonists are proven right, then what is he standing for? If he has lost the core of himself, then what else matters?
"Nothing beside remains" is Vogel's assertion. To him, Sherlock has become a "half sunk shattered visage", a man proven to be futilely struggling against the inevitable. Rochester plunges to his death, refusing to give Sherlock the answer he desires. Rochester stands firm on his ground till the bitter end, leaving Sherlock alive, questioning everything about himself. Doesn't that sound like a spiritual failure, the worst form, since he achieves his goal but is left internally shaken and broken?
And for me, THIS is, paradoxically, the entire point of these stories. It's the very charm, the magic of the new FW SH games.
Sherlock Holmes, one of the most popular fictional characters mankind has ever seen, is the personification of rationality and reasoning mind, at least in the original design and/or public interpretation. He was created and celebrated in the new dawn of science and rationality, the age of enlightenment and reason. At the time, human beings worshiped reason as the worshiped gods. Many believed everything was rational and all problems could be solved by science and progress. The all-mighty rationality of humanity could overpower the greatest gods in history.
Well, we all know how that went.
In a way, Sherlock Holmes is a god himself, a myth collectively created by the minds of the Age Of Reason. His methods marked a revolution in criminology and forensics studies. This never existed character is sometimes called "the father of modern forensics". It could easily be one of the most absurd things in human history; nevertheless, evidence-based detection is much superior to the crude and erroneous methods used before. It's no surprise that someone believed justice could be achieved merely by applying those new methods.
We all know how that went as well.
The essence is: human rationality and the ability to reason are limited; humans are always prone to be affected by feelings and other factors than pure reasoning--it's etched in our physical existence. Falsely believing in the equation "reason = correct" is fatally dangerous. I don't mean it in a negative way; on the contrary, only by recognizing the limits of reasoning can humans improve society. The fundamental merit of the scientific method is to question and test existing theories and find breakthroughs from challenging things that used to be believed to be the truth. For a true rational mind, "truth" and "objectivity" are really holding a thin layer of perilous ground, ready to be tipped over by newly found evidence. The very foundation of our existence and all human knowledge could be challenged at any time--it happened before, and it will happen in the future. And the truth-finding time always brought some doubt, commotion, and chaos.
Now, that starts to sound familiar, not unlike what is conveyed in these two games, doesn't it?
In the wake of the ever-shifting understanding of the universe and the chaotic scientific development and new findings, facing the challenge of questioning every piece of knowledge that humans used to hold true, the sense of emptiness, meaninglessness, and absurdity of human existence emerged. Believing in gods, or whatever "irrational" higher power used to be the source of life's meaning and purpose, a way to find comfort despite the dangerous and chaotic state of being. And now all these are shattered--not only the notion of gods but also the mere idea of something we could always hold true, never to be challenged.
Cthulhu mythos is one of the products of this sense of desperation and emptiness--cosmicism, the focus on an indifferent universe and the insignificance of human existence, and the fear triggered by facing the cosmic void.
It may sound gloomy and pessimistic, although Lovecraft himself said it was neither pessimistic nor optimistic, only scientific. I don't think being scientific and pessimistic are inherently contradictory, they are in two different realms. This view is, in a way, scientific and rational, the universe, as we can see now at least, doesn't have a purpose, and human beings are not the center of the "meaning" of the universe, if it ever has one.
Therefore, I conclude that the Cthulhu mythos is the dark side of human rationality. Or being less judgmental, the original myth of hopeful and powerful reasoning power, represented by Sherlock Holmes, and the dismal, pessimistic picture painted in the myth of otherworldly gods, Cthulhu being the most prominent, are the two sides of the same coin.
And here is the very question: where do we stand between these two powers? Or: what is the meaning of life?
In this line of thought, I see SHCO and SHTA as a set of stories exploring the realm of existentialism.
This idea may appear like my overthinking and over-reading the games, which I don't deny entirely--I enjoy digging deep into something until my interpretation surpasses its own intention. Nevertheless, I don't believe I make it all up--the repeatedly mentioning of Sisyphus in SHCO is more than a dim hint, but a strong implication.
In Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus, the figure Sisyphus represents the human condition of the absurd--the desire for meaning in life contradicting the silent, indifferent universe. Our life is like Sisyphus' predicament--rolling a giant rock uphill only to watch it fall down helplessly, then repeat the same toil again and again. The predestined falling rock could also be a metaphor for the inevitable death waiting for everyone, yet we unfailingly roll it up, without the hope for it to stay even a moment. In the quest to seek reason and ultimate truth, the situation is not unlike the falling rock. We see in history that no matter how perfect a scientific theory seems, it always ends up being challenged and modified, even thrown away.
There are three stages of this journey in the absurd and existentialism realization: first, one is not aware of their meaningless existence, thus ignorantly happy; then, as soon as one becomes conscious of the absurd, they are in the center of a tragedy; yet, only when one is fully aware of the true nature of their being and face it, scorn it, own it, could it be conquered, and only then, true happiness could be achieved. "At each of those moments when he leaves the heights and gradually sinks toward the lairs of the gods, he is superior to his fate. He is stronger than his rock."
Back to SHCO, in the gallery scene, Sherlock makes two assertions: "Feelings are simply one's animal ancestry trying to wrest back control of the brain." And "Mankind's highest achievement, above all others, is objective and rational thought."
He is not wrong, only too confident, even arrogant. Vogel is not wrong to say "men never act freely and rationally anyway," either. The fact is we can never totally free our brains from our animal ancestry, and when we hold our achievements in too high a position and refuse to reevaluate, we are surely doomed.
At this point, Sherlock is unaware of the absurdity of rationality and holds tightly onto his ignorant happiness and confidence. The end of the game marks his entering into the next phase when he acknowledges his own tragedy, with a trace of hope that he is braving it and taking control.
Later in SHTA, when facing an even larger challenge, Sherlock tries in vain to maintain that everything can be explained by reasoning mind. Yet as he sinks deeper and deeper into madness, he once again goes through the phases of acknowledging the absurd, this time questioning not only his personal history but the very meaning of the whole world. It is definitely a tougher task for him, and the end is gloomier than SHCO since he shows less courage and hopes for a better future.
Nevertheless, in each ending of the two games, in the struggles, failures, and shattered hopes, when he falters, doubts, and fears, he somehow always holds true to his purpose--an obsession, comments Mycroft. Obsession may it be, it is the meaning he attributes to his course of actions.
At the end of SHTA, it is hard to point a finger at what is exactly the thing he fights for. Truth? Justice? Love? Humanity? Connection with another human being? Maybe a portion of each, but that's not all, not the core of it.
On the top of the lighthouse, Rochester convinces him that everything is real. Sherlock is not winning in their argument, just like when he confronts Vogel, not much to argue against the man other than pointing out his intention was malicious. He can't prove Vogel or Rochester wrong.
Yet he tells Vogel, "I remain", which is the most powerful thing he could say, and all that matters. Vogel believes that he has made Sherlock "let go of the rock", but he fails to understand Sherlock--he doesn't see the truth rock he holds.
He himself is the rock. The meaning is in himself and himself only.
That is what he uses against Rochester, not his logic or intelligence, not even his morality or humanity. Nothing matters but his, and the world's very being itself.
There is a very interesting point in the lighthouse scene, in terms of the thinking process and structure of belief, Rochester and Sherlock Holmes are not that different.
Rochester makes it very clear, everything is real, and it is only rational to accept it as it is. He knows Sherlock and knows him very well. He knows what kind of man he is, and what he values the most--his love for knowledge and truth, his deepest fear and weakness. He knows Sherlock has doubt in his heart. He knows exactly how to counter each argument, maybe in a way Sherlock himself would put it. "One must imagine Icarus happy...(ah, another reference to The Myth of Sisyphus, the last sentence being "one must imagine Sisyphus happy.") And were you to ask him of his choice, he would have not a single regret." Doesn't that perfectly summarize Rochester himself and Sherlock Holmes? At the end of SHCO, hasn't Sherlock "plummeted to his death" spiritually as he found out about the truth of his mother's death? Jon died, and so did part of himself. Yet he insists on flying toward the sun, again and again, with no regret, no looking back, seeking only the truth, or whatever he holds true. Rochester, in this sense, is no different. They are but one at this point. It's not only an irony that the most famous Sherlock Holmes quote comes from his mouth, but also the very essence of this story: Now we both know the truth, that I am right about this world. Then what else stands between us, what else do you hold against me?
In a practical sense, Sherlock has John and his brother, and the knowledge he has gained in the journey, all that can help him win the fight. But in the philosophical and spiritual aspects, he is defeated, temporarily at least. He is forced to his knees, admitting everything is real. Also, in the epilogue, we see how much he is suffering, not able to fully recover from the nightmares.
But also in the philosophical aspect, victory and defeat matter little. As Sherlock tells John, "If our future is black, it is better surely to face it like a man than to attempt to brighten it by mere will-o'-the-wisps of the imagination." For him, the notion of hope is meaningless, a wishful thought. He determines to face everything as it is, without dressing them up with his fancies and lies.
As he lets go of everything, he gains it all.
When he finally completes processing the madness of the world, when Rochester believes he can defeat Sherlock this time, Sherlock finds the peace and courage to face it, and tells Rochester, "maybe your god is unstoppable, but you are merely a man. And I know how to stop you."
What is the point, I would imagine Rochester asks, if you know that Cthulhu is bound to come sooner or later? If the world is predestined to be destroyed, what is the point of stopping me here, only to prolong the empty and meaningless suffering of humanity?
And this choice, when facing the same premise, is what I believe to be the fundamental difference between Sherlock and Rochester, and Vogel too: Sherlock chooses to roll the rock uphill despite knowing it will eventually fall down.
Crazy as his behaviors are, Rochester's line of thought is not that hard to understand: If Cthulhu is predestined to destroy the world, then I am only following the inevitable. The world is meaningless thus as well destroyed. Vogel follows the same logic: men never think rationally, then why bother? Better only feel and consume since striving for reason is futile.
In their mind, the rock must stay at the top, or there is no point in rolling it up. If not forever, then never.
Don't we, our society, tend to think the same way? If one changes their mind or changes the course of their career, marriage, hobby, etc., we judge them to be a failure, at least in the previous pursuit.
But when death is inevitable, and everything must be put to a stop eventually, then what and who is not a failure?
The highest rationality, on the other hand, is to recognize this inevitable ending and the futility of maintaining certainty and eternity, and go from there.
And this is the essence of Frogwares' myth of Sherlock Holmes, the one who faces the ultimate meaningless, the absurd, and the destruction at the end, yet still "remains". At this moment, "being" is the most, and the only powerful thing, to stand on one's ground and defy the inevitable like Sisyphus rebels against the gods. It doesn't matter how much Sherlock questions himself, doubts everything, and struggles against the darkness; it doesn't matter his own mind lingering between reality and madness. Just as "there is no
sun without shadow, and it is essential to know the night", there is no reason without doubt, no reality without madness, and no happiness without gaze into the abyss of the absurd. Despite all the suffering, he remains, holding tight to the rock--himself. And that's all that matters. At this point his victory is the only INEVITABLE, as Camus puts it, "The lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time crowns his victory. There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn."
Therefore, one must imagine Sherlock Holmes happy.
Please go check out the full zine, everyone worked so hard and did so great!!! I’m so happy to have been apart of this 🐙💚🔎 I love these games so much and it was amazing seeing the fan community come together :)
I actually think I got it... I don't know if it makes 100% sense, but I will try.
To understand it, we gotta go at the very beginning of the game, to Sherlock and Jon's first convo:
In this scene, Sherlock is unsure if the journey was worth the effort, because Mycroft believed nothing could be gained from it and his brother's words have gotten to him. Not only this, but he is sick and he likely senses that there is more to the journey than it seems. Jon, on the other hand, is certain that it's gonna be worth it.
If we assume for a moment that Mycroft was aware of how they felt as they took off - that Sherlock was still unsure about the journey even as he undertook it, and that Jon, on the other hand, was very much sure that it was the right thing to do, then from Mycroft's perspective, it would look like Jon was pushing Sherlock to do it. Of course, Sherlock wanted to visit Cordona as well, but it was likely Jon's influence that convinced him to actually get on a ship and do it. That's how it would look to Mycroft.
And since Mycroft humours Sherlock A LOT when it comes to Jon, he addresses Jon like one would address an actual person, whose influence has pushed his brother to do something he'd later come to regret.
He not only "I told you so"s Sherlock, he scolds him for not listening to him but to Jon. From Mycroft's perspective, it's Jon who is the instigator - he is the reason Sherlock is there, and he wants to know why.
Of course, this is only the superficial level. "Is he worth it?" is a very loaded question and Mycroft looking at Jon while he poses it is very intentional. He not only holds Jon partially responsible, he is also a little resentful, because Sherlock has, yet again, chosen to listen to his imaginary bestie over his brother. Is it far-fetched to assume Mycroft is jealous? Of course, Mycroft knows Jon isn't a real person, but the relationship Sherlock has with him is very real, and Mycroft is too smart to underestimate the influence Jon has. He doesn't have a body, but he has Sherlock's trust - something Mycroft has not. Not treating Jon like a real person wouldn't improve his relationship with Sherlock at all. Of course, Mycroft plays along! He is also smart enough to know Jon isn't just a piece of fiction - he must be aware that Jon is a part of his brother.
Jon, on the other hand, well... "Mycroft's nonsense still rattling around in your head" haha, yeah, Jon doesn't agree with Mycroft at all. He also asks Sherlock why Mycroft is there, because he is upset by the insinuation that he isn't worth listening to. They are two opposite forces in Sherlock's life, and in these two conversations, they both try to convince Sherlock that the other is wrong. Like the devil and the angel on one's shoulder.
I think we get a good glimpse in how their lives have been before Cordona - Sherlock always torn between reason (Mycroft) and emotion (Jon), but somehow always picking Jon's side. Yet still, Mycroft's influence over Sherlock is apparent as well, and the more he matures, the more Sherlock becomes like his brother. But the way there frustrates Mycroft a lot, because no matter how much he loves Sherlock, he can't get to him.
The whole "was it worth it?" question being posed at the beginning and at the end, but we don't get a direct answer. We can answer it for ourselves.
My entry for the Frogwares Sherlock Holmes Fanzine!
I was not sure about my contribution when I first submitted it, but after letting it marinate, it was not that bad XD
And of course I love how this fanzine has turned out! Everyone did such a great job 🤍
