fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3035 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3035 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 081 secrets from Secret Submission Post #434.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

What is a Holmesian and how do you identify as one? Can you like the books on their own merit without doing whatever that entails?

That's just a casual term for those in the classic ACD SH fandom. And my problem is that no, I cannot like the books on their own merit. Too much of my love for the canon has been built upon and interwoven with my knowledge and admiration of Doyle.

I realize that is not a particularly common stance in fandom. But it is the way I am. Creators are VERY important to me.

Do they have his side of things? Idk, maybe he was so traumatized by his first wife's death he didn't want any reminders of her or something. Grief does weird things to people.

Did he reconcile with them later? Did he keep up his responsibilities financially, even if not emotionally? The story doesn't end where you left it, does it?

They definitely do not have his side of things, and Lycett adopts as vile and uncharitable a tone as ever I heard from a biographer. But his facts are all accurate, he did heaps of research and was much lauded for it a while ago.

It is true that Louise's death and illness were a very traumatic ordeal for Doyle, and I would actually agree that on some level it's a case of "grief doing weird things to people". He did later reconcile with Mary (Kingsley died in his youth), and she even helped him run his Psychic Bookshop. He did also supply her with some money (though at the time, he seems to have used her financial dependence upon him as a tool of manipulation).

They never quite made up, though, and he left the entirety of his creative copyright to Jean's children instead. There are accounts of Mary living in relative poverty, while Adrian&Dennis Conan Doyles were basically rich playboys.

The situation isn't exactly unambiguous, of course. Perhaps it is also that I come from a place of emotional bias myself - I'm a child abuse victim who's still struggling with what happened, so it's hard for me to understand - let alone forgive - a person who does things like this, for whatever reason.

Do you believe abusers can change or repent? If they reconciled later on, it sounds like he might have.

I don't know :( I got burnt so many times after my abuser told me that they're sorry and that they would never hurt me again.

I do want to believe he did change, and you're right, there's evidence to suggest that. Though I don't see why he had to be so unjust to her in his will if he really recognizes that he was doing something wrong.

Honestly, I'd rather the abuser that neglects consistently than the one who pretends to be and gives themselves airs about a good caring person but keeps going back on their word and being a dick, so there's that.

You said he left the creative copyright to the second family, but did he leave anything for her that wasn't Holmes? Did he cut her out entirely?

Same anon

Tbh to me it the story sounds like it might be someone who is trying to forget his wife's death and move on but is irrationally resenting the children for not letting him do that. If he didn't neglect the other children there has to be some reason the children of the first marriage were singled out to be ignored. That he mentions sentimentality being weakness of character stands out as possibly very relevant, idk

[ SECRET POST #3035 ]

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)