![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jan. 19th, 2010 12:00 amI . . .
I want to write a Sherlock Holmes/Mairelon the Magician crossover.
The overlap would work, just barely. Magician's Ward is set around 1817, two years after Waterloo; A Study in Scarlet is set in 1881. Kim is 18 in MW, so she'd be about 82 by 1881 -- but she'd still be around.
Of course, I could just totally disregard the dates, claim that Watson was actually fighting in First Anglo-Afghan War rather than the Second, and set the story in the middle of the century. Ooooor, of course, I could set it pre-ASiS; Holmes was a consulting detective before Watson moved into 221B, and if he's in his 30s (at least one Sherlockian scholar has set his birthday as 1854, which is good enough for me), I could conceivably set a story in the early 1870s, when Sherlock is a very young man. But that still leaves Kim and Richard rather in their twilight years, which somewhat prohibits the possibility of Magical Detecting Action Hijinks.
Am I overthinking this, or is it really this important to maintain the distinction between Regency and Victorian eras? I feel like it has to be, because if I start just lumping everything set in the 19th century into the stew, I'm going to end up with Kim and Richard teaming up with Sherlock Holmes to solve the mystery of Mrs. Lovett's Pie Shop, and Sherlock meeting Alice Liddell in an opium den as they both search for mental stimulation, and all of them meeting a rather haggard young doctor named Victor Frankenstein whose ideas about necromancy horrify the Merrills for their ill-conceived-ness and Mrs. Lovett for their wastefulness.
. . . All right, so maybe that would be awesome, but I'd have to read Frankenstein first.
>.>
I want to write a Sherlock Holmes/Mairelon the Magician crossover.
The overlap would work, just barely. Magician's Ward is set around 1817, two years after Waterloo; A Study in Scarlet is set in 1881. Kim is 18 in MW, so she'd be about 82 by 1881 -- but she'd still be around.
Of course, I could just totally disregard the dates, claim that Watson was actually fighting in First Anglo-Afghan War rather than the Second, and set the story in the middle of the century. Ooooor, of course, I could set it pre-ASiS; Holmes was a consulting detective before Watson moved into 221B, and if he's in his 30s (at least one Sherlockian scholar has set his birthday as 1854, which is good enough for me), I could conceivably set a story in the early 1870s, when Sherlock is a very young man. But that still leaves Kim and Richard rather in their twilight years, which somewhat prohibits the possibility of Magical Detecting Action Hijinks.
Am I overthinking this, or is it really this important to maintain the distinction between Regency and Victorian eras? I feel like it has to be, because if I start just lumping everything set in the 19th century into the stew, I'm going to end up with Kim and Richard teaming up with Sherlock Holmes to solve the mystery of Mrs. Lovett's Pie Shop, and Sherlock meeting Alice Liddell in an opium den as they both search for mental stimulation, and all of them meeting a rather haggard young doctor named Victor Frankenstein whose ideas about necromancy horrify the Merrills for their ill-conceived-ness and Mrs. Lovett for their wastefulness.
. . . All right, so maybe that would be awesome, but I'd have to read Frankenstein first.
>.>
