"A Study in Emerald" by Neil Gaiman and the Martin Wallace board game of the same name

Neil Gaiman's "A Story in Emerald" is a particularly well-conceived mashup of Sherlock Holmes and the Cthulhu Mythos, which was originally published in Shadows over Baker Street, edited by Michael Reaves and John Pelan. I first learned about it last April when Russell came across a Kickstarter campaign for a board game by Martin Wallace inspired by the story. We were sufficiently intrigued to back the campaign and I used Russell's June birthday as an excuse to buy a book in which the story appeared:  New Cthulhu: The Recent Weird.

Our copy of A Study in Emerald (the game) arrived at Chez Morsie sometime around Christmas, but we hadn't gotten around to playing it so when our friend Michael brought his copy to game night last week, I jumped at the chance to learn the game even though I hadn't read Gaiman's story yet. I read the story today.

The story is set in an alternate Victorian London that should seem pretty familiar to readers. The biggest difference between "A Study in Emerald"'s London and that of Doyle is that Victoria is one of the Great Old Ones, who have been ruling the planet for the past 700 years. Like Doyle's "A Study in Scarlet," "A Study in Emerald" introduces the consulting detective and his narrating companion. There is a murder with which Inspector Lestrade and his team need assistance. At the crime scene "RACHE" is spelled out in the victim's blood, though in this case the blood is green. While I am no expert on the Sherlock Holmes canon, it seemed to me that Gaiman admirably maintained the feel of Doyle's/Watson's writing (though this is helped along by the fact the story's introductory passages mirror that of "A Study in Scarlet"). I liked how Gaiman was able to introduce the backstory of the Great Old One's takeover without having it seem like a tangent. While I enjoyed "A Study in Emerald" as I was reading it, when I finished the story I was thrilled. I can't explain why without spoiling it (I even insisted that Russell must read it himself). There's more in "A Study in Emerald" for Sherlockians than there is for Lovecraft aficionados, but I'd recommend it to both (and especially to readers who appreciate both Doyle's and Lovecraft's worlds).

A Study in Emerald (the game) is built upon the political tensions described in Gaiman's story: the Great Old Ones rule the world, but there is a group of "restorationists" plotting to overthrow them. In the game, which plays 2-5, players are randomly and secretly assigned to either the Loyalist or Restorationist factions. Ours was a 4-player game and I was the token Restorationist; I did not win.

Interestingly enough, per Wallace's design notes, the inspiration for A Study in Emerald was not Gaiman's story but The World that Never Was by Alex Butterworth, a history of anarchism.

I felt that there was enough material her for a board game but was note sure about the reception it would receive. I had this feeling that some players might object to a game where your main occupation would be going around blowing up various world leaders. It just so happened that I had recently read "A Study in Emerald" which suggested a solution to my problem--turn the leaders into monsters, thus depriving them of any sympathy they may otherwise garner. (Design notes, A Study in Emerald rule book, 16)

Not to mention the added cache of both Gaiman and the Cthulhu mythos with gamers.  If nothing else, the "A Study in Emerald" overlay was marketing genius.  I don't tend to spend much time reading rule books (preferring to have games taught to me) and I would skip over design notes just as I usually skip over acknowledgments in the books that I read. I had Russell dig out our copy of the rule book when I started writing this post because I wanted to read Wallace's justification of his inclusion of zombies¹ (and vampires) in the game when they don't appear in the story,² and that's how I learned about the real inspiration for the game, which I found particularly interesting.

1. For what it's worth I was holding my own against in the Loyalist faction until the zombies card was in play. When Dan, who had the zombies card in his card, managed to get his hands on a card that allowed his deck to cycle more quickly, I (and the Restorationist cause) was doomed.
2. He justifies zombies because of a real life Dr. Frankenstein-type individual that appears in Butterworth. He has no good excuse for including vampires.

guess what we Kickstarted today

A card game based on Pride and Prejudice!

Designed by first time designer Erika Svanoe

with art and graphic design by Erik Evensen (an award-winning graphic novelist)

Marrying Mr. Darcy is a strategy card game where players are one of the female characters from Jane Austen's novel Pride and Prejudice. Players work to earn points and attract the attention of available suitors. Our heroines do this by attending events and improving their characters, but advantage can be gained by the use of cunning. All of their efforts are in hopes of marrying well and becoming the most satisfied character at the end of the game! (Kickstarter page)

Theme is one of the things that I'm drawn to when it comes to game-selection and I do love Pride and Prejudice.

Should Elizabeth accept the safety of Mr. Collins' proposal for fewer points or should she hold out for Mr. Darcy even though he may not propose at all.  If you aren't careful, she's destined to become an old maid. (intro video)

What P & P fan wouldn't want to play this game?¹

But, we didn't decide to fund the game just because of the theme.  Russell agrees that the game looks promising.  He could have vetoed it.  And it can be played as a two-player game.  We've tried to not buying games that don't accommodate two-player (only) play because we have/had many 3+ player games collecting dust on our shelves. 

The Kickstarter campaign is already fully funded (with the "Undead Expansion" stretch goal), but there are still 9 days until it ends (on 17 October 2013). The estimated delivery date for Marrying Mr. Darcy is February 2014 and I am so looking forward to getting our copy.

Full rules have been posted on the game's website for potential buyers' review.

1. That's a rhetorical question. I'm sure that there are some hardcover Janeites who will dislike it for one reason or another. I promise however to force a JASNA insider to play Marrying Mr. Darcy with me once it arrives and will report back.

bookish birthday presents

Voracious readers almost always get books or reading-related items as gifts. The most recent birthday for this reader was no different.

I received books - 

The Complete Works of Shakespeare

This one hasn't arrived yet, Russell bought it "new and used" from Amazon so we'll see if it's actually the wished-for David Bevington-edited edition when it arrives.

Fundraising the Dead by Sheila Connolly

A cozy mystery (and the first in a new series) set in a museum cum research library. The only problem: per the back-cover text the archivist turns up dead.

The Novel Cure by Susan Elderkin and Ella Berthoud

The subtitle (From Abandonment to Zestlessness: 751 Books to Cure What Ails You) of this very recent release says it all. This book went straight to the top of my wishlist as soon as I heard about it.

Perfumes: The A-Z Guide by Luca Turin and Tania Sanchez

A reference book that includes reviews of 1200+ fragrances.

Sock Yarn Studio by Carol Sulcoski

Full of diverse non-sock patterns that call for the most collectable of all yarn: sock yarn.

And two blank books (pictured below)

The design of the one on the right is a close-up of hand-knit fabric.

I also received some items that were inspired by books -

Once by Nightwish CD

Because it has a song entitled "Nemo" (presumably inspired by the character from 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea) that popped up on one of Russell's Pandora stations and that I appreciated at the time.

Parade game, designed by Naoki Homma

An Alice in Wonderland-themed card game with fantastic new art work.

The Swarm game, designed by Michael Kiesling and Wolfgang Kramer

A board game based on the novel by Frank Schätzing, which I haven't (yet) read.

A Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martin

A Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martin
Series: A Song of Ice and Fire (1)

Despite hearing people rave both about the A Song of Ice and Fire books and the television show based on them,¹ I really had no interest in reading A Game of Thrones until recently. First, I was introduced to A Game of Thrones: The Board Game² at our Monday-night gaming group. Everyone in attendance that night had read A Game of Thrones except Russell and I, which make me feel irresponsible for some reason. Then, for a secret santa swap, I was assigned someone who adores both the books and the series. So I simply had to read A Game of Thrones so I didn't completely botch the A Song of Ice and Fire-themed package I decided that this person needed.

I finished A Game of Thrones tonight after a fit of monogamous reading. Actually I listened to the (e)audiobook narrated by Roy Dotrice, who with the exception of an occasional slip-up on the names³ did a nice job. I read A Game of Thrones quickly not because I found it particularly suspenseful (and researching for my swap package yielded at least two spoilers). My dedicated reading was primarily due to the fact that I hated having two giant fantasy novels in progress at the same time.⁴

I'm not dying to read the next book, but neither am I resistant to continuing along with the series. The thing I liked most about the novel was that it was told from a number of different points of view. I found the story as a whole fairly compelling, but much of that had to do with wanting to get back to one character or other to find out how they were faring.

Apparently the series is inspired by the Wars of the Roses. The reference seems apt, but honestly I don't know enough about those 15th century battles of succession to say how closely the novel(s) follow actual events. A Game of Thrones (and I assume the series as a whole) is heavy on violence and bloodshed, which is understandable even if not welcome. I do admire the fact that Martin has no qualms about killing off significant characters.

1. Not everyone raved, but the ravers outnumbered those less enthusiastic.
2. For what it's worth I really did not like the game (and I have no desire to play it again). This strategic free-for-all type of game is not my cup of tea and I found the iconography on the action tokens extremely confusing. As House Baratheon I started out in position of power. I still had the Iron Throne at the end of the game, but I didn't play well by any stretch.
3. Calling "Joffrey" "Jeffrey" and pronouncing Lady Stark's name as "Caitlin."
4. Russell has me reading Lord of the Rings and it is going to take me forever to finish. And, yes, I'm counting it as three separate books in my tally for the year.

reading H.P. Lovecraft

Even though I'm not supposed to be buying books for myself, I did pick up one during this latest blog-neglecting period. When I was book shopping for my nieces and nephews (a post on that topic coming soon) I happened across this deeply discounted title: Tales of H.P. Lovecraft, introduced and selected by Joyce Carol Oates. Now that we (finally) have a copy of Arkham Horror, a board game built around H.P. Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos, I felt it was high time that both Russell and I read Lovecraft's work (and I love the cover art). I also figure that I might as well share my thoughts on the individual stories on the blog. So far I've read the first three.

The stories included in Tales of H.P. Lovecraft are supposedly his major works. I'm not sure if the stories are arranged chronologically or with any rhyme or reason and I don't remember reading anything about that the arrangement in the volume's introduction.

Joyce Carol Oates' Introduction (9.5 pages)
I appreciated getting a bit more biographical information about Lovecraft. What a horrible, horrible mother he had. JCO references many writers while placing Lovecraft in the context, explains the Cthulhu Mythos and its origins, identifies the overlap of Lovecraft's imaginary geography with areas in the Northeast United States, and outlines reader response. However some of the most interesting bits of the essay aren't specific to Lovecraft and his work.

JCO on the difference between genre and literary fiction:

Readers of genre-fiction, unlike readers of what we presume to call "literary fiction," assume a tacit contract between themselves and the writer: they understand that they will be manipulated, but the question is how? and when? and with what skill? and to what purpose? However plot-ridden, fantastical or absurd, populated by whatever pseudo-characters, genre-fiction is always resolved, while literary fiction makes no such promises; there is no contract between reader and write for, in theory at least, each work of literary fiction is original, and, in essence, "about" its language; anything can happen, or, upon occasion, nothing. Genre fiction is addictive, literary fiction, unfortunately is not. (xiii)

Nostalgia: "To love the past, to extol the past, to year in some way to inhabit the past is surely to misread the past, purposefully or otherwise; above all, it's to select from the past only those aspects that accommodate a self-protective and self-nourishing fantasy" (xi).

"The Outsider" (5+ pages)
Even though I'm pretty sure that I had not previously read any Lovecraft, I was struck with profound sense of déjà vu when reading "The Outsider." A disappointing start to the collection, short with its surprise ending so obviously that even twist seems inappropriate.

"The Music of Erich Zann" (7 pages)
A bit creepier, but the framed narrative gives the reader a bit too much distance.

"The Rats in the Walls" (16 pages)
Finally a really good ending. "The Rats in the Walls" gave me hope for both Lovecraft and this volume.