First, some unfinished business from the last section. I was so pleased with myself for recognizing the foreshadowing for the next book in the series, Clouds of Witness, in the beginning of this sentence when Peter is telling his brother why having an amateur detective in the family might be useful:
“You may come to want me yourself, you never know. When anybody comes blackmailin’ you, Gerald, or your first deserted wife turns up unexpectedly from the West Indies, you’ll realize the pull of havin’ a private detective in the family.” (Bourbon Street Books, 146)
that I completely missed the jab/nod to Jane Eyre, one of my favorite books! How embarrassing to miss one of the references that I actually know the referent for, among the many that Sayers lobs at the reader along the way. I, an American living a century later with a decidedly non-classics based education, figure I miss most of those, and just wave as they fly by over my head.
We know by now who did the murder, so the puzzle, while important to Sayers, isn’t the whole raison d’etre for the book. She wanted to add multidimensional characters, and polished prose more typical of literature, while still being engaging enough to keep the reader turning pages. By this point, I was definitely turning pages, eager to know what the details were, as well as to relish passages of insight like this, of the medical student observing Lord Peter, who:
“had a funny way of talking about books, as if the author had confided in him beforehand, and told him how the story was put together, and which bit was written first. It reminded you of the way old Freke took a body to pieces.” (149)
Peter goes to confront Freke, who offers him a shot. If this were a movie, the audience would be shouting, no, no, don’t do it! Freke touches him and prepares to inject him:
“You’ve had this kind of thing before, I expect.”
“Oh, yes,” said Lord Peter. He watched the cool fingers, fascinated, and the steady approach of the needle. “Yes–I’ve had it before, and d’you know–I don’t care frightfully about it.”
He had brought up his right hand, and it closed over the surgeon’s wrist like a vice.
The silence as like a shock. The blue eyes [Freke’s] did not waver; they burned down steadily upon the heavy white lids below them. Then these slowly lifted; the grey eyes met the blue–coldly, steadily–and held them.
When lovers embrace, there seems no sound in the world but their own breathing. So the two men breathed face to face.
“As you like, of course, Lord Peter,” said Sir Julian, courteously. (174)
Whew, I was mentally fanning myself; that is a pretty hot encounter for an attempted murder.
We conclude with chapter 13, the confession letter which is an excruciating 15 pages long. That kind of lag in pacing would never stand in a modern novel. I was amused that Freke was cut off before he wrote about administering an obscure poison, since that was one of the in-jokes and a forbidden thing for members of the mystery club that Sayers would soon come to be part of, and then lead after G.K. Chesterton’s death, then pass on to Agatha Christie.
And here endeth the first book in the Lord Peter Wimsey series. Accusations of anti-semitism aren’t just a modern occurrence. They happened in Sayers’s lifetime, and baffled her. She thought she was not only being quite fair to the Jewish characters, but even complimentary, which some of her biographer’s attribute to her being in love with a Jewish man at the time. But I find Sayers is justly accused of veering over the line into the racism and intolerance of the time, even while she may have seen herself as being more tolerant, and even generous than other writers. She was more open minded than some, and less than others. Not guilty, not innocent, just flawed and human.
For those new to the series, I don’t recommend reading the Afterword by John Curran; lots of spoilers. For those that have read the series and are interested in more biographical information, I recommend the H.D. and Sayers chapters in Francesca Wade’s group biography Square Haunting–both women lived in the same flat, and were involved with a guy named John Cournos, who shows up in both their works, as they show up in his. Thinly veiled autobiography was a thing they all did, apparently.
I didn’t and don’t love this book, but I do love aspects about it. Bunter and Parker already have charmed me. Peter is going to take some getting used to. The wit and sparkle of the writing entertains, and the puzzle had me reading to the end. I liked it enough to keep going. Now, knowing how much better the series gets, I can see how much was sown right at the beginning.
What delighted you? What bothered or puzzled you? And, how are you feeling about reading Clouds of Witness (schedule to come right after I post this) next?
K.J. Boldon 