How many Sherlock Holmes fans are here

Watch this video https://youtu.be/zd-DIuqVZ2Y. I’m subscribed to their channel. Since I can’t afford spending thousands upon thousands on first editions, is it true thatAmaranthine press will be publishing letterpress Sherlock Holmes stories? I know some of you guys helped me with my limited edition club Sherlock Holmes. So, please let me know if any affordable small press (letterpress) editions of Sherlock Holmes short stories are coming out in the near future.

I’m Sherlock Holmes fan since I was a little kid. I remember being so impressed by SH. I was walking around the house investigating and arresting our guests and relatives for leaving our toilet seat up. Still crazy about Sherlock Holmes as an adult, but stopped arresting people for leaving a toilet seat up

Amaranthine’s first letterpress title will be Catch-22 sometime in 2023. Their Sherlock Holmes will, unfortunately, be offset.

>2 Dr.Fiddy: Actually, I believe they changed their mind on this and have delayed Sherlock until early 2023 to be able to print it letterpress.

This is because they anticipate it being the first in a series and want them to be consistent.

>3 NathanOv: it needs to be the first in the series, especially if they make it affordable lol

>2 Dr.Fiddy: >3 NathanOv: thank you guys for sharing this information. Please post here if you get more information about it.

>3 NathanOv: I hope you are correct, as I'm unlikely to bother with another Sherlock Holmes acquisition unless it's letterpress.

>5 Shadekeep: exactly. Letterpress is the next best thing after the first editions of Sherlock Holmes

>3 NathanOv: Ok, I didn’t know. Hope you’re correct :)

>7 Dr.Fiddy: me too.

We have some of Sherlock Holmes Adventure of the Creeping Man left at Arete! Lovely, even if I say myself, letterpress edition.

>9 marceloanciano: Consider me enabled, I've ordered the book and slipcase. I've been wanting a title from Areté Editions in my collection, and this is the only one which interests me so far. I do hope you'll diversify to other authors in future, though I'm sure you're thrilled to have the relationship you have at the moment.

>10 Shadekeep: Thanks!

>9 marceloanciano: thanks and thanks for reasonable prices too

>10 Shadekeep: Also, yes, we do intend to have some very different authors coming up, there was an interview with me where I talk about the future (and the past) and our intentions https://www.collectiblebookvault.com/post/minds-of-the-press-vol-2
m

>12 horrorbooks: No, thank you! You keep us all going.

>14 marceloanciano: lol only when it comes to Sherlock Holmes.

>15 horrorbooks: lol! Frozen Hell?

>16 marceloanciano: lol thanks for reminding! Most importantly, I received okay from my wife to buy it. Can’t wait for it. Is it gonna be ready before New Year?

>17 horrorbooks: I'm really hoping to get pre-orders out by then, it depends on Rich finding time to mock up his ideas!

>18 marceloanciano: thanks for the info. Fingers crossed for Rich to find time asap. Just want to let you know that I’m ready with my credit card.

>13 marceloanciano: Frozen Hell Yes! I'll be down for that one, I backed the first Kickstater that recovered the manuscript and have really been wanting a fine edition of it. Also in for Lud-in-the-Mist and Brave New World. Kudos!

>20 Shadekeep: awesome! I want these books on my shelves already. Better than a chocolate ice cream. Lol

>11 marceloanciano: Received Adventure of the Creeping Man, thanks! Very nice volume, I'm impressed at the quality and the illustrations. I can solidly recommend this one to Sherlock fans. The production reminds me favorably of No Reply Press's work, which is a compliment.

>22 Shadekeep: Thank you!

How about this one by Paul Nash of the Strawberry Press, not strictly a fine press book, lithographically printed, but a good price.

http://www.strawberrypress.co.uk/holmes.html

>24 TudorBlackPress: Thank you, enabled.

This pastiche was authored by Paul W. Nash - Honorary Librarian to the Folio Society from 1994 to 2007.
Here is a message posted on his behalf at the FSD forum dated 16 Mar, 2010 regarding genuine/ artificial bindings used by The Folio Society; and perhaps during the final stages of publishing his The Remains of Sherlock Holmes, 2011.
https://www.librarything.com/topic/86527#1856839

>22 Shadekeep: Congrats nice edition by Arete. I think this is nicest of them all, well except for first editions.

>26 horrorbooks: It's the only Areté book I have so far, but I'm very pleased with it. I look forward to more from them.

>27 Shadekeep: Me too. I can't wait to get my hands on "Frozen Hell." "The thing movie really scared me when I was a kid. lol

>28 horrorbooks: It would be really interesting to see the illustrator from The Creeping Man, Gary Gianni, do the illustrations for Frozen Hell. I think his style would be very effective, and a striking departure from other adaptations that have relied on more modern-looking illustration techniques.

Incidentally, I just found this limited illustrated edition of The Call of Cthulhu that he did. I feel an order coming on...

>29 Shadekeep: I need color and really scary illustrations for the frozen hell book to buy it. Illustrations are very important for me to like before I buy

>26 horrorbooks: Thanks!

>27 Shadekeep: I hope you find more of the books we do desirable too

>29 Shadekeep: Call of Cthulhu was a labour of love for Gary and myself, we originally planned to do it all ink line and paintings, we mapped it out as such, but no publisher wanted to do it as it would have taken a long time for Gary to do, so we published, also with Flesk, the sketchbook, then Flesk asked if he could reprint that sketchbook version so Gary and I decided to redo the whole book which became the one that is on sale now. Very proud of the way it came out. It was a culmination of our years of experimenting with how a readers experience could work enhancing a 20 page story into a 90 page book. I still feel it is a successful read.

>30 horrorbooks: Are you on our email list? Did you see some pics of Greg's Thing? hmmm, ok, can't find the link that tells me how to post pictures here...

>34 marceloanciano: I think I am on your list since I remember signing in with my email. Can you just take pictures of illustrations with your cell phone and post it in here. You can use postimages.org very easy.

Just checked, I'm subscribed to your email.

>34 marceloanciano: >30 horrorbooks: Is this the one you're referring to? Love the style, and the slightly obscured / out of view monster!

>33 marceloanciano: I've ordered the Call book limited edition, thanks for the background on it! Very cool how it worked out in the end, I think I'll enjoy reading it very much.

>36 NathanOv: Wow, that's great! I do like that style. I think this story works better with the suggestion of horror than overly detailed sketches, just like Lovecraft's works.

>36 NathanOv: Thank you. I also remember seeing color illustrations, but it was probably some time ago.

>37 Shadekeep: can you please provide the link, and I will order it too. Well, if you don't mind

>36 NathanOv: Yeah! Thanks, I was just trying to reduce the image I had to fit, but you have saved me a lot of work!! I love this image, it's so evocative.

>39 horrorbooks: Happy to enable, here you go: https://www.fleskpublications.com/books/gary-gianni-call-of-cthulhu-deluxe-hardc...

Limitation of 500, includes a tipped-in remarque.

>37 Shadekeep: Here's a link to an article by Flesk talking about the difference between the two books https://www.fleskpublications.com/the-making-of-the-call-of-cthulhu-a-mystery-in...
Hope you like the read!

>41 Shadekeep: Thank you! Just purchased my copy with shipping it was little over $50. Great price! hopefully the quality will be great to match the illustrations.

>42 marceloanciano: reading it now, very informative.

>42 marceloanciano: Thanks, that was interesting. Especially nice to see the comparisons of the early pencils versus the finished pencils. Jazzed to be getting this!

>43 horrorbooks: Agreed, if the production quality of the book lives up to contents, it will be quite the bargain indeed.

>45 Shadekeep: I did not even see if it was smyth sewn binding. I purchased it very fast lol. I saw the video and it has illustrations on every page. Deluxe hardcover edition should be smyth sewn and not glued with a really thick paper since this is just a short story.

>46 horrorbooks: I think I see signature sewing on some of the open-book photos, perhaps marceloanciano can confirm the binding.

>47 Shadekeep: I think I see it too in the pictures, little holes. Yes, need confirmation from marceloanciano

>47 Shadekeep: Yeah, sewn signature folios, I got 10 unsewn to bind as a leather edition, just trying to fit it in with Ludlow's timings, but going to do a special edition.

>48 horrorbooks: It's a really nice little book, well made and solid, nice little red foil block under the DJ too.

>50 marceloanciano: Thank you. Can't wait to get it and put a mylar on it. It's going to look great next to the Frozen Hell. Are you getting my drill. lol

>49 marceloanciano: Thanks so much, and please let us know here on the forum if the special edition becomes available. Perhaps a day or two ahead of the rest of the world. ;)

>52 Shadekeep: I concur with Shadekeep and marceloanciano, please don't forget we need Frozen Hell before New Year, no pressure

>20 Shadekeep: That 'Frozen Hell' is going to be a must on my shelves too!

>37 Shadekeep: Just superb. I need that book!

>55 ChestnutPress: Very good! I'm surprised I didn't know about it sooner, usually all books regarding Lovecraft filter down to me rapidly. Seems like this one might be something of a light under a bushel. And potentially a bright light indeed!

>55 ChestnutPress: >56 Shadekeep: >53 horrorbooks: Since I don't think they're discussed in the thread, some of the early details shared by >50 marceloanciano:, Rich and Phil are extraordinary and worth noting.

The "channeled" binding on, I believe, the lettered solander is like nothing I've seen, and Mr. Manchess' art sounds to be getting a truly spectacular treatment with lay-flat multipage spreads and top-of-the-line printing.

Arete truly seems to be the dream publisher for lovers of fine press illustration and creative book design.

>57 NathanOv: I've been catching glimpses of Arete's Frozen Hell on Insta for a little while. They basically had me at the get go. While not usually one for novels, a fine press edition of 'The Thing' couldn't be missed!!

More of an FYI. Just saw this article: https://mspmag.com/arts-and-culture/mn-largest-sherlock-holmes-collection/

>59 dpbbooks: thank you very much for this article. Really enjoyed it

>59 dpbbooks: Thanks! And now I have a new entry on my list of "places to hole up in after the apocalypse".

Unfortunately, I had to cancel my order of "The Call of Cthulhu" by Flesk publisher because of "H.P. Lovecraft’s original text has been revised in this book." I absolutely don't buy books that were revised by the publisher. Kind of disappointed because the art in this book is really nice.

>62 horrorbooks: I'm curious what entirely unedited version of The Call of Cthulhu you've been reading.

Do you similarly exclude the heavily revised versions of Frankenstein, Dorian Gray and others that are now the standard published texts?

>62 horrorbooks: That's a shame, but it's not a fine press book for history but was intended to be a mainstream bookstore book for young adults and we never made any claim for it to be canon but a cool reading experience. A cross between a graphic novel and book.

>64 marceloanciano: I understand and clearly see why you did that. Hopefully, Frozen Hell and other books that you publish will not be revised or abridged in any way. I'm looking forward to your fine edition books.

>63 NathanOv: Dorian Gray, I have unabridged first illustrated edition 1910 Paris in English/ should be 1908 but the artist fell ill, and it states on the colophon page by the publisher (lucky me) and my early Frankenstein edition from 1800's; as well as Folio society limited edition of the Call of Cthulhu, were not revised.

>65 horrorbooks: No, different sort of publishing. In Fine press you have to go for what the author wrote, come what may, but publishing in a more mainstream world requires a lot of decisions that one has to make (like shelving in book stores with the paperback) but when we do Fine Press books, which is about authenticity as much as the reading experience, you follow the manuscript.

>67 marceloanciano: thanks for explaining the difference. I honestly learned something new today about mainstream vs fine press books and not just when it comes to limitation and materials used.

>64 marceloanciano: Is it actually abridged/condensed, or does it just have objectionable language replaced? I have less of an objection with the latter, though in fine press I do prefer to have it exactly as it was written and deal with any problematic sections myself.

>69 Shadekeep: This isn't in regards to you personally, I just find this such an odd concern that I see recur so frequently.

It only seems to come up when dealing with "objectionable" content despite the fact that works are revised by editors, publishers, the writers themselves, and translators; abridged, copyedited in subsequent editions, inadvertantly altered over subsequent publications, updated for clarity & consistency, etc. You are almost never reading the work "exactly as it was written," and the authors manuscript is rarely the published version of the work.

I think publishers should take note of any revisions, particularly if it's the removal of "objectionable" content so as not to excuse the author, but with so many different editions existing of so many classic works, with and without the input of the authors, I just don't see the supposed ethical or artistic imperative that others feel in these situations.

I personally don't find Lovecraft's original manuscript (nor the original published version - they do differ) the best possible version of this story, and think subsequent editors have done it a favour.

>69 Shadekeep: They have replaced and changed words for mixed race, Lovecraft was not a fan of mixing races, they were degenerates for him.
edit: And frankly, it is such a good story, one of the best, that he didn't need to put that in, and we did want kids to read Lovecraft, often for the first time, and it didn't affect the story.

>70 NathanOv: This is exactly right.

In most cases there is no such thing as "Just following the manuscript".

For example, in reprinting The Waste Land, should one follow the first published text in The Criterion magazine? Or the Hogarth edition? Or the Boni & Liveright text? Do we incorporate the changes which Eliot made by hand in the copy he gave to his mother? Do we include or not the notes which Eliot wrote under orders from his publisher, but later regretted?

Any editorial work is complicated, and I see no difference between fine, private, or trade publishing in this regard. If anything, because the stakes are so much lower in fine/private press publishing (because of vastly smaller distribution), there is more license to experiment. Sometimes wildly! See, for example, Greenboathouse's incredible The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius (Sort Of).

I wouldn't change an offensive word in a text I was publishing, but I don't think it's particularly un-fine press to do so.

P.S. The Harvard Classics are a great case of heavy-handed editorship. I highly recommend reading a Harvard Classic text alongside, say, a Penguin Classic or Modern Library edition. The interventions are delicious!

>70 NathanOv: Don't get me wrong, I'm not salivating to read racial epithets, nor do I have a problem with judicious editing. It's more the kind of arbitrary elisions that I have an issue with, such as when some folks wanted to change Mr Toad from saying "poop poop!". I do think that some problematic text is contextually relevant however, when it reflects the mode and mindset of the time. For example, I don't think Mule Bone would have the same impact if the n-word was replaced. (Granted, its authors have more license to use that language than most.) My greater concern is with abridgement and condensing, as I think it takes a much better editor to do that well than is needed simply to clean up the language.

>71 marceloanciano: That's entirely fine, thanks, and makes sense within a mass market release. Lovecraft is kind of a special case for me, because he is one of those brilliant people who illustrate a certain theory (Kurt Gödel is another). It's the theory that in many cases brilliance can be just as much fueled by the flaws in our character as by the merits. In Lovecraft's case, he was so xenophobic that his fear of different people translated into this broader horror of difference, full stop. Everything from the outside was chaotic, alien, and unimaginable to him, including other cultures. While this is by no stretch a laudable or desirable trait in a fully formed human, it nonetheless is something he was able to transmute into brilliance. Eliding it from his works can have the effect of masking this process, though again, in a work intended for a more general audience (as opposed to one for devoted aficionados and scholars) such elisions are understandable.

I hope I've given my thought process here some proper context. I'm certainly not allied with the bigots who just want to read prejudicial writing for it is own sake.

>73 Shadekeep: I exactly agree with statements that you made here. I want to read the book the way it was written and intended by the author and judge it by myself instead of reading something that publisher thought was okay to revise.

>72 grifgon: Now that actually surprises me. I can see a poet editing their own work, or shaping the final version with a trusted editor. But after that it should surely be canonical, no? I mean, language is so utterly vital in poetry, not just for image and meaning but for meter and (sometimes) rhyme. A finished poem to me seems more like a painting or sculpture - tinkering with any part of it alters the whole. Why are there so many versions of The Waste Land? Does the same issue of multiple version plague, say, The Raven?

Multiple versions of translated poems I understand, and one could argue there never is a final, canonical version of those, apart from the poem in its original tongue. But I find it pretty boggling that well-established poems are being modified post facto by anyone other than the poet themself.

>75 Shadekeep: poets are inveterate tinkerers.

The many versions of Leaves of Grass being a famous example.

Paradise Lost has official ten and twelve book versions, both by Milton.

Etc.

I would distinguish between a variety of revisions by the author and later adjustments in the original language by others with ulterior motives, however.

>62 horrorbooks: You are not the only one

>67 marceloanciano: Thank you for the explanation, which gives me greater confidence in Arete Editions.

>76 abysswalker: I would distinguish between a variety of revisions by the author and later adjustments in the original language by others with ulterior motives, however.

Exactly. If all of those versions are the author fine-tuning or even remixing their work over time, that's one thing. If it's other people sticking their oar in to "make it better", that's where I have an issue.

>75 Shadekeep: Oftentimes, the poet themself is the source of multiple versions (as abysswalker suggests).

And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,

Or, imagine that a poet (especially an up-and-coming one) is asked to change their work slightly at the request of their publisher. Are they in a position to say no? Should future editors accept those changes, or revert the text back?

Take Emily Dickinson for example. Here's an excerpt from A Voice of Silence: On Punctuation in the Poetry of Emily Dickinson, an excellent paper by Caitlyn Bartz:

Dickinson’s eccentric use of punctuation also sets her poetry apart from that of her peers. Most of her poems that follow ‘grammatically correct’ punctuation were actually heavily edited by someone besides the poet. Glancing through The Complete Works of Emily Dickinson, an easily-discerned pattern appears: earlier poems, published and edited under the discretion of Higginson and Mabel Loomis Todd, fit the grammatical and aesthetic palettes of readers at the time, while those published later on tend to retain Dickinson’s signature punctuation.

So, the canonical versions of the poems may have been heavily influenced by Dickinson's editor/publisher. Should we try to "Dickinsonize" them back to what Emily may have preferred? Should we leave them alone?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Standards continue to change, but it was once much more common for editors to freely change texts, especially around archaisms, spelling, and punctuation.

The often-heard advice, "Stick to the original!!!", enormously simplifies the entire practice of editorial curation. It's like telling a baseball pitcher to "Just throw strikes". Which strike? At what speed? For which batter? And what if the wind changes?

This is fun. Here's Dickinson's most famous poem on the two leading online poetry websites:

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42889/hope-is-the-thing-with-feathers-314

https://poets.org/poem/hope-thing-feathers-254

Different!

>72 grifgon: Surely there is a very meaningful difference between edits made by the author (or with the author's consent) and those made by others without it. And another meaningful difference between editorial changes and bowdlerizing, either of the original variety or its latter day woke incarnation.

>81 ultrarightist: I agree. Professional publishers and editors work very hard to litigate these differences.

>79 grifgon: I appreciate it's not a simple matter, but at some point there does exist a central text for most works (I concede that it does not exist for all). I tend to prefer the author's favored text as canonical, so yes, if Dickinson considered her version truer to her voice, that's the one I personally would go with. The massive Vance Integral Edition revisited all the works of Jack Vance and restored the texts to his original intent, undoing what in some cases had been decades of established editorial changes. Of course such restoration is easier when the author in question is still alive and engaged, as he was at the time. And these are the versions which are now canon, rather than the published versions which had been extant for most of his life. The age of a specific version alone does not equate to canonisation.

I do grant that long-term tinkering with a work by the artist does not ensure the finest result. This is something painfully clear in the realm of film. I've lost track of the various editions of Blade Runner out there, but only a couple of them are candidates worthy of vying for canonisation in my opinion. Of course, I don't get to decide that, and thus the debate is born.

So yes, there is no easy answer in some cases when it comes to a work of literature. But I do think it's possible, and desirable, to return to the text the author favored when possible and work from there. Granting of course an exception where the author was in declining ability and driven by other reasons to revisit their work (see again Blade Runner).

This is of course a rule of thumb and not an inviolable axiom, and merely how I would be likely to proceed were I a publisher. But regardless of the starting point, egregious editing for its own sake is always to be avoided. A good editor should be an editor, not a failed writer looking to express themselves via tinkering with better authors.

>81 ultrarightist: Regarding bowdlerizing: I think there's latitude for a thoughtful editor/publisher to intrude on a text over an issue of offensiveness. Look no farther:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_Then_There_Were_None#The_title

And Then There Were None (as we now know it) is the best-selling mystery novel of all time. Would it have achieved as much success if the U.S. publisher hadn't changed the original U.K. title? I don't necessarily think they were wrong to do so.

>83 Shadekeep: "I do think it's possible, and desirable, to return to the text the author favored when possible and work from there."

I agree completely. Issues mostly arise because "the text the author favored" is unknown. Like you said, "If Dickinson considered her version truer to her voice, that's the one I personally would go with." I agree, but we have no idea what Dickinson preferred. Hence, very respectable publishing houses offering completely different versions of the same text. It certainly makes things interesting! I think editing and publishing, like most matters of the humanities, depend on, like you said, "rules of thumbs and not inviolable axioms."

>83 Shadekeep: a tangent, but Dickinson is maybe not the most useful example here, since she didn't publish almost any of her work when she lived. More than 1800 poems discovered in manuscript, and I believe she published around 10 poems piecemeal during her life, and no collections.

>84 grifgon: A guess an upside of a poet revisiting their works multiple times is that it's like a band covering their own song. A (very obscure) example are the multiple versions of Santa Dog put out by The Residents. Each is quite distinct, but for someone looking to re-release a version (or include it in a compilation), they have latitude to select the one they prefer. It's made all the more interesting if they can explain why they chose that particular version, just like having a colophon explaining why a certain version of a poem was chosen over the others is enlightening.

>85 abysswalker: That's a good point. My initial comparison was The Raven, as Poe was alive to see most of his work into print and there is clearly an established version of that poem that he approved. For someone like Dickinson who neither got to see her work in print nor get editorial guidance on much of it, it's difficult to know what she herself would have considered a polished final version of each.

>86 Shadekeep: Great example — I like The Residents from what I've heard! Even obscurer: One of my favorite bands, Box Set, continuously re-recorded their own songs across their roughly 15 year career. They started off as buskers in Western Europe, cutting cassettes one by one to sell on the street. Then they got an indie label to sign them. Then another indie label. Then a major label. Each time, they re-recorded their stuff, so we have the same songs in drastically different form. Even the names of the songs changed! Compare "Back in Amsterdam" off their eponymous album Box Set with "Amsterdam" off Thread a decade later.

>87 grifgon: That sounds really cool, I'll have to check them out!

Not fine press but promises to be a quality book nonetheless.

https://www.magnetic-press.com/early-access-sherlock-holmes/

I have backed several of their titles previously, and will likely go for the Holmes/Lupin double set when it goes live.

>89 Shadekeep: Looks different from any other Sherlock Holmes books. Something new. I like cartoonish illustrations in these editions. thanks for sharing it. I want limited slipcase edition. Can't go wrong for $85

>90 horrorbooks: Magnetic Press focuses heavily on art books and Euro-comics (Bandes Dessinées), so they are great with illustrated works. The books are typically large and substantial, with excellent art reproduction. The price for the combined slipcase edition is frankly a bargain.

>91 Shadekeep: Thanks for posting this. I will probably go for the slipcased edition, as well.

>91 Shadekeep: I'm in for it. Provided my email to buy it. Thanks for enabling me. My wife hates you, just kidding.

>93 horrorbooks: 😆

Here's the KS page as well if you want to save the project to your account there. Serves as a nice notification backup.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/neurobellum/sherlock-holmes-a-study-in-scar...

>94 Shadekeep: Thanks, much obliged to you. We like SH in my family.

>89 Shadekeep: Thanks for post yet another SH pastiche. I’ll also be ordering the slipcase edition.

I wonder if they plan to publish the rest of the series as well.

>97 Noel_G: I'd be surprised, they seem to move from project to project at light speed. But if they get a good response they may do another volume with a similarly high-profile story. My money would be on The Hound of the Baskervilles, that would fit their lineup well and be very suitable to illustration.

I have a very nice edition of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes (NOT FINE PRESS!) with very nice full color, full page illustrations by Barry Moser. It is a trade book, published by Morrow in their Books of Wonder series. It is readily available and well worth owning, I think.

>99 Glacierman: liked the illustrations that I looked up on the internet. Indeed, a very nice edition you have.

It's live!

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/neurobellum/sherlock-holmes-a-study-in-scar...

>101 Shadekeep: Got mine slipcase edition. Thank you

>101 Shadekeep: Thanks again for posting this. I picked up a slipcased set. Love the art.

>102 horrorbooks: >103 whytewolf1:

Great, glad you both were able to get the version you want! I went for the slipcase double volumes as well.

For those off Facebook, Amaranthine's upcoming Sherlock Holmes collection is going on preorder soon for a Q3 2023 delivery, and has been confirmed to be letterpress in 3 states, with the addition of the "library edition:"

"This edition will be printed letterpress as well, but on a different paper from the lettered and numbered edition, and without some of our special bells and whistles. Worry not, it will still feature our signature design, so you’ll be able to get a great book at a lower price point. This edition will come in 520 numbered copies. Should this edition be well received, we might be able to publish Catch-22 in three states as well, and all the future titles, too."

I suspect that this is in part due to a numbered / lettered price increase, but they've also announced there will be a subscriber discount. Lots of other general press details in the post, which I think you can see without an account.

>105 NathanOv: Sounds like a smart move, especially given the market for Sherlock titles. They have a better chance of covering demand with this tier, as well as catering to those buyers who aren't as concerned with the fine press aspects. I hope to get a higher tier myself.

Here's one Sherlock fan who isn't excited by that cartoon Scarlet. Obviously, I'm not backing it.

>105 NathanOv: that’s good, especially if they publish it with original Paget illustrations

Start saving your shillings!

https://amaranthinebooks.com/newsletter/elementary/

>101 Shadekeep: Did anyone else get a scammy email after finalizing their pledge, from Neurobellum, asking to complete the order by filling up a questionnaire?

I was initially very confused, because the pledges are finalized on KS, and then realized it was a very misleading and optional attempt to gather up additional information.

>110 What_What: I got the same thing. Is it actually from Neurobellum? I couldn’t tell, but it seemed kinda fishy

>110 What_What: Kickstarter explicitly prohibits creators from farming demographic information or any info not essential to fulfilling a pledge. Sometimes, creators will turn to outside methods of doing so (sometimes sketchy). This is still in violation of Kickstarer's policy, though.

>110 What_What: >111 jsg1976:

I've gotten those kinds of emails from a handful of projects. Most of the time they are exactly what you think, a way of getting more data about you in order to see if there's other projects you might like. A couple creators use their own tracking and management system and they get you to sign into that to streamline the order and delivery process. Oceanus Brass is one such place, and if I recall Neurobellum is another. So it was probably legit. I've backed them before so I didn't get a first-timer email this time. But I seem to recall from the last time I backed that they do have their own in-house system. They're a pretty prolific publisher so I imagine it's a standard part of their online storefront.

Still, it's wise to always exercise vigilance in such things. Certainly never disclose sensitive information about your account or payment through these emails, only through the established channels.

>113 Shadekeep: I emailed them asking if it was actually a way to complete the order and got this response:

This is not the formal survey to complete the order -- that will be later in the month after the campaign is complete. This is just an interest survey to help us better understand our backing community so that we can continue to learn and improve. 😊 It is purely optional.

I may very well consider canceling my pledge, I really don’t have the tolerance for this kind of thing (outright lies from a company), and was iffy on the book anyway.

>114 What_What: Ah, that's a shame if they used misleading or unclear language. I would understand pulling out if that rankles. I had another project send me a link that signed me up for some kind of general crowdfunding newsletter (when it initially appeared to be specific to the project), and that ticked me off as well. I understand why they do it, but do think they should treat backers with more respect.

Amaranthine Books' Sherlock mockups are out! But ordering is only available at the moment for matching rights holders:
https://amaranthinebooks.com/shop/

>116 whytewolf1: if anyone is interested in a numbered Amaranthine Sherlock with the rights-holder discount, feel free to send me a message! I think I’ll be happy with just the library edition of this one.

>117 NathanOv: I will ask around.

>117 NathanOv: Would that equate to the Detective Edition? If so, I might be interested. What's the discount bring it down to?

>119 Shadekeep: yes, that’s the Detective edition! It’s $580 with the discount.

>120 NathanOv: Oh, thanks, that is indeed tempting. One thing I'm curious about is if any of the editions weigh less than the others. It's a rather thick tome!

I'd like to mull your offer a bit if that's okay. But if anyone else comes along with a definite interest, please honor their request first. And thank you again for making the offer!

Like the detective edition of SH by Amaranthine. Definitely on my list. Thanks for sharing this info.

>121 Shadekeep: Well, I’d imagine that lettered edition is quite a bit heavier! The books themselves are probably all fairly similar, though, since I think they’re all the same size this time around.

I’ll update my comment if anyone claims my copy!

>123 NathanOv: >121 Shadekeep: I’m pretty sure I saw a comment from Marko on FB that the Library edition is thinner than the others due to the upgraded paper on the higher states, so it may be lighter as well

>124 jsg1976: Thanks, that's what I was wondering, since it's a different paper stock. I tend to read in bed, and at my age the lighter the book the better. ^_^

In case anyone is deciding between the two, I went back and checked the TOC of the Thornwillow Sherlock, and all of the stories in that volume are included in the Amaranthine Press version.

>126 jsg1976: That’s right - both pulled from Arthur Conan Doyle’s “12 Favorite Sherlock Stories,” but Amaranthine is publishing all of them while Thornwillow only did a selection.

>127 NathanOv: so it make sense to get lettered edition. We can have all Sherlock Holmes 56 stories letterpress editions, and it still be much cheaper than getting first editions of SH

>128 horrorbooks: I may be misreading your message, but Amaranthine is only publishing 12 stories, and all three states contain the same stories.

The highest and middle tiers are using the same paper, so the weight should be very similar, barring differences in the boards.

>129 NathanOv: I thought they will be making all 56 short stories. Anyhow, I’m in for 12 stories letterpress edition. Thanks for clarifying

Here's the story list, it really is a greatest hits list overall.

The Adventure of the Speckled Band
The Adventure of the Red-Headed League
The Adventure of the Dancing Men
The Adventure of the Final Problem
The Adventure of a Scandal in Bohemia
The Adventure of the Empty House
The Adventure of the Five Orange Pips
The Adventure of the Second Stain
The Adventure of the Devil’s Foot
The Adventure of the Priory School
The Adventure of the Musgrave Ritual
The Adventure of the Reigate Squire

But I'm curious, if you could add any one story missing from the list, what would you choose? I think I'd have to pick either The Adventure of the Six Napoleons or The Adventure of the Copper Beeches. How about you?

EDIT: Corrected a title

>132 Shadekeep: Man, it's been so long since I've read Holmes that I couldn't begin to make a choice. I think I need to re-visit Baker Street.

>132 Shadekeep: thanks for sharing this info. I think I would like to see Sussex vampire and wisteria lodge. I also like six napoleons, and copper beeches was really creepy story

>133 Glacierman: It's been a while for me as well. Hoping my next re-read will be from an Amaranthine edition.

>134 horrorbooks: Good choices! Wisteria Lodge in particular has a kind of quiet menace that works well.

>135 Shadekeep: can’t wait to hold this book in my hands lol

it seems like a bargain even at $580 by AB. Most of the famous Conan Doyle stories included in this book are from Adventures and Memoires of sherlock Holmes. First editions of these books, even in miserable and poor condition, will be much more than $580. Just ordered mine since I have matching rights from Amaranthine. Don't like the illustrations at all but probably get used to it. Why they had to come out with illustrations that remind me of some video game.

The Amaranthine Sherlock Holmes collection is up for public sale now. Don't see a purchase link for the Clue Edition, possibly was all claimed by members. Picked up the Library Edition myself.

>138 Shadekeep: I think any remaining Clue Editions will go to lottery.

>139 NathanOv: That would make sense, as they are the prestige edition. Thanks!

>140 Shadekeep: No problem! Looks like 4 unclaimed copies are going to lottery.

>141 NathanOv: Not bad! If so, then 22 (or nearly 85%) were pre-purchased. I assumed you had to specifically have matching rights from a previous lettered edition to be able to buy it, rather than any level of matching rights.

>142 Shadekeep: that’s right, it would’ve been owners of the Frankenstein lettered edition.

They seem to have a good 10-20% attrition with each lettered edition, but the last two both sold out via the lottery, so I expect the same with this one. Though I’m not remotely considering it myself!

Got detective edition but absolutely hate illustrations

>143 NathanOv: According the email Amaranthine sent out, this has been their best launch yet, and only three Lettered editions are going to lottery. Very nice!

Got my copy of the Magnetic Press Kickstarter today. Honestly, I was pleasantly surprised! It’s a sewn binding and has pretty good paper quality and art density for the tier it’s operating in. The art looks quite fun too! I’m not sure what to do with the baubles that came with my backing tier, but that’s a relatively minor issue. I’d be happy buying from them again.