truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
[personal profile] truepenny
Before I embark upon my (rather peculiar) reading of Whose Body?, I thought I should sweep the floor and say some things about the series as a whole, because I won't remember to talk about them otherwise, and they kind of need to be said.

First, I have absolutely no idea how many times I've read these books. N is somewhere between 5 and infinity; since I didn't discover them until I was in graduate school, the cap is probably below 20, but it's definitely past the point where there's any use in counting. I mention this because it means that this series of posts will have spoilers indiscriminately for all the books in the series. If you haven't read Sayers ... if you haven't read Sayers, what are you doing reading this? Go! Find! Acquire! Devour!

Ahem. Anyway, spoilers will be endemic for all nine novels and however-many short stories it is, including "Talboys."

Also, this next bit, behind the cut tag, is going to have serious spoilers for Ngaio Marsh's Singing in the Shrouds.


Class and race-based snobbery. Yes. All over the place. People talk about DLS's anti-Semitism, and, yes, it's there. But it's hardly the only thing modern readers can take offense at (the portrayal of Hallelujah Dawson in Unnatural Death, the relentless mockery of Mr. Thipps and his h's ... I won't go on). Also, her anti-Semitism is not of a sort that obscures humanity. Nobody in Whose Body? ever suggests that they should not catch the murderer merely because the victim is Jewish. Everything we learn about Sir Reuben Levy establishes him as a character whom we pity, whose death we regret, who loved and was loved. This is in sharp contradistinction to the homophobia of Singing in the Shrouds (Marsh), where the murder of the inoffensive gay steward is treated as unimportant; the only thing that anyone cares about is that Mrs. Dillington-Blick (whom I personally quite dislike, although I can tell Marsh wants me to like her--or at least be indulgent toward her as one might be toward a spoiled but charming child) escaped. I like Singing in the Shrouds as a mystery and for what she does with the closed world of the ship, but the cavalier dismissal of Dennis's death as Oh-thank-god-it-wasn't-her absolutely infuriates me. Sayers does descend to cheap stereotpying, but she does not erase the humanity behind it. Sir Reuben Levy's death MATTERS.

At least, that's how I read things.

I should also note that one of the principal things I'm interested in is the way in which Sayers engages with the genre of mystery fiction; I'll be talking about series detectives and tropes. This may make my discussion of the early books look a little strange.

My love for DLS is largely uncritical, but I do have to note one perennial problem, which is that she has absolutely no conception of which things are physically possible and which aren't. This is most woefully obvious in Murder Must Advertise, but it also shows up in Clouds of Witness: Peter's adventure in the bog takes place, please note, only a day or two after he's had his collarbone broken by Goyles. And in Whose Body?, I noticed this charming little feat:

[Mr. Thipps] slipped outside, and he had no sooner done so than Lord Peter, lifting the body quickly and cautiously, turned it over and inspected it with his head on one side, bringing his monocle into play with the air of the late Joseph Chamberlain approving a rare orchid.
(Sayers 16)

I love this image (the corpse as orchid), but this is a heavy corpse IN A BATHTUB. I don't think Peter could lift it quickly, and I certainly don't think he could turn it over as if it WERE an orchid. It's an extremely consistent blindspot (consider also the fact that Peter climbs through the bell chamber at the end of The Nine Tailors and neither dies nor goes deaf), and having admitted its existence, I'm not planning to mention it again.

Right. Those are the general caveats. Whose Body? is up next.


---
WORKS CITED
Sayers, Dorothy L. Whose Body? 1923. New York: Avon Books, 1961.

Date: 2003-04-15 09:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oracne.livejournal.com
Ooh, I'm so excited! [bounce, bounce]

I read the books for the first time in middle school, which was the early 1980s. I then reread the whole series in high school, and again in college, with occasional single rereads scattered in there. I think GAUDY NIGHT wins for most rereads, or maybe MURDER MUST ADVERTISE.

the portrayal of Hallelujah Dawson in Unnatural Death

Boy, reading that's an eye-opening historical experience--it reminds me every time I read it that 1927 was an alien time. Also reminds me of the one Jeeves & Wooster book with the elaborate subplot involving blackface disguise.

Date: 2003-04-15 09:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yonmei.livejournal.com
Oh, good! Looking forward to it no end. I discovered the Wimsey novels sometime around 1982, I think - I was about 15 or 16 - and as my parents had them all (I went out and bought what short stories they didn't have) I read them all in short order, and have been re-reading them ever since. I belong to the Lord Peter mailing list on Yahoo, and to the Harriet Vane mailing list which discusses the Jill Paton Walsh additions to the sage.

Date: 2003-04-15 10:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] truepenny.livejournal.com
Am I a terrible person if I admit that Roderick Glossop in blackface which he can't get off, skulking around Chuffy's estate desperately trying not to be caught, is one of the funniest things I've ever read? Well, that whole sequence, including Pauline Stoker in Bertie's bedroom. But, yes, I am extremely grateful that we never have to see the actual performance which required the blackface.

Does anyone remember the name of that particular Jeeves & Wooster book? I've read them all, but the titles are completely meaningless.

Date: 2003-04-15 11:06 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] truepenny.livejournal.com
I ignore the existence of Jill Paton Walsh's contributions.

I have a particular, abiding, virulent hatred for "sequels" like that (of which the latest is a horror entitled Mr. Darcy's Daughters--no, really, I'm not making that up). I don't read them. I can't talk about the without frothing at the mouth. It's a personal idiosyncratic twitch, and I certainly don't think anyone else is wrong or wicked for reading and enjoying that sort of thing (well, unless they're really bad). So it's nothing against Ms. Walsh in particular, just that the idea gives me the creeps.

I've found that I reread the series as a series, although I'll occasionally reread individual novels, most often Murder Must Advertise or, for some strange reason, The Five Red Herrings. But generally it's an all or nothing proposition.

Date: 2003-04-15 11:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oracne.livejournal.com
Hopefully someone will, because I no longer own the book--I couldn't remember for my post.

Date: 2003-04-15 11:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oracne.livejournal.com
most often Murder Must Advertise or, for some strange reason, The Five Red Herrings

Because both of those involve Peter outside of his normal milieu?

That's one of my chief reasons for loving MMA. That and the brief appearance of Peterkin.

FRH is fun for "ah, it's just his lordship." Hee.

Date: 2003-04-15 12:17 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yonmei.livejournal.com
I ignore the existence of Jill Paton Walsh's contributions.

I still haven't read A Presumption of Death (I will when it comes out in paperback) but I was very pleased to get Thrones, Dominations. (JPW is one of my favourite writers, and I'd been aware that Sayers had left one unfinished Wimsey MS at the time of her death.)

Presumption is loosely based on the Wimsey Papers, which are frankly not Sayers best contribution to the Wimsey saga, and while I enjoyed JPW's writing in Thrones, the first chapter of Presumptions (which she made available on the Harriet Vane list) was good enough to enjoy, but distinctly not Sayers.

In short, I really don't think that JPW's contributions - or at least, not Thrones - quite deserve to be dismissed with the same contumely as those endless sequels to Pride and Prejudice, or the dreadful Scarlett. However, I recognise this is a matter of personal choice ;-) and you won't find me nagging you just to try it.

Date: 2003-04-15 02:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ex-ajhalluk585.livejournal.com
Ooh, lovely, A good DLS ws not as conservative as painted debate - and, btw, I think while she is not good about male homosexuality (though one wonders how Ryland Vaughen in Strong Poison slipped past)she has some remarkably sympathetic lesbians (Mary Whtiaker is nasty, but Clara and Agatha, in the same book, are stunning).

Date: 2003-04-15 02:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] truepenny.livejournal.com
Yes, and I think Mary Whittaker's unrepentant nastiness has very little to do, either in my view or DLS's, with her lesbianness. Vera Findlater's an idiot, but she's a good-hearted idiot, and as you say, Clara and Agatha are amazing. They partake of the butch/femme paradigm, but also clearly had a real and loving relationship, and Agatha's femme-y silliness again doesn't seem to be part of her lesbianness, but part of her identity--and NO ONE in the book has anything but the utmost respect for Clara Whittaker.

Male homosexuality seems to be largely invisible in the Wimsey books, as far as I can tell. (And maybe I'm missing things because I'm not sensitive enough to the way the subtext was coded in the 20s and 30s.) And considering the nastiness with which Ngaio Marsh and Georgette Heyer treat their gay characters, I'm actually kind of glad for that.

Date: 2003-04-16 09:02 pm (UTC)
vass: Small turtle with green leaf in its mouth (Default)
From: [personal profile] vass
Yes. About the class- and race-based snobbery, and also about the physically impossible feats.

The fishpond act in Murder Must Advertise jarred me, which is more than it should have done to Lord Peter when he tried it.

The other big objection I have to Sayers (which doesn't mean I don't like her, or negate the fact that Gaudy Night is one of my two favourite novels in the whole world) is Peter and Harriet's cruelty sometimes - the particular way they laugh at the people around them. I noticed it very much in Busman's Honeymoon. It came into relief for me when I read Dorothy Dunnett's Checkmate, in which (I'm trying to avoid spoilers) the dinner bit. With the ship. Jason and the Argonauts. They're laughing too, but they retain their sympathy.

I haven't read all the Wimsey novels, by the way - I'm afraid I skipped most of the early ones - so I'm reading Whose Body right now.

Date: 2003-04-17 09:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] truepenny.livejournal.com
I tend to locate that kind of unthinking cruelty in DLS rather than in Peter & Harriet, which makes it easy (in my head) to love the books and simply not agree with the author. This may be a personal exercise in rationalization, but I'm at peace with that.

I don't read Dunnett, so I can't comment on the comparison.

Date: 2003-04-26 02:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pdcawley.livejournal.com
Just from the reading of Whose Body? I rather think that the raging snob is actually Bunter. Peter comes across not so much a snob as detached.

Date: 2004-01-15 01:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] keswindhover.livejournal.com
I am here commenting on this old entry, because I've just posted a short Wimsey story and a couple of people have asked me about 'The Wimsey Papers'. I used an article describing them for my story but couldn't find the text of the articles themselves, and I recalled that you have posted extensively on Dorothy L Sayers and may therefore be assumed to be a bit of an expert.

Are they to be found anywhere online do know? I would be grateful for any pointers you can provide.



Can I ask you something totally off-topic re

Date: 2004-01-15 01:36 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] truepenny.livejournal.com
I'm really not an expert. I've read Sayers's books and one (not very good) book of criticism. That's it.

But, about your question: I don't know of anything myself, but the place to start would be the Dorothy L. Sayers Society (http://www.sayers.org.uk/).

There's also Harriet's lesbian friends

Date: 2004-04-27 08:40 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
Eiluned Price (almost a parody of Welshness) and the other one whose name I can't remember. --John Cowan

Impossible feats are in the tradition

Date: 2004-04-27 08:44 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
...of Sherlock Holmes and other detectives. In "The Speckled Band", when Roylott casually bends an iron poker to demonstrate what a macho man he is, Holmes as casually straightens it -- considerably more difficult. This whole theme is sent up in the Sexton Blake pastiches in MMA. --John Cowan

Lesbians etc In DLS

Date: 2004-08-14 09:39 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
I t hink that there is a reference to gay men in Bellona Club, when Ann Dorland tells Peter Wimsey of her love affairs and says that she fell for soeme guy and he was "one of those people"... so it didn't work. peter replies that "they cant help themselves" or words to that effect. Re lesbians, I wonder does Sayers see lesbianism of the modern sort - which may involvle physical sex, as bad compared with that of older "couples" like Clara and Agatha, who possibly just lived together and did not share a bed? G

Profile

truepenny: artist's rendering of Sidneyia inexpectans (Default)
Sarah/Katherine

February 2025

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
161718192021 22
232425262728 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 31st, 2026 10:25 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios