Strong Poison
This is one of Dorothy L Sayers’ Lord Peter Wimsy mystery novels. Generally I’m not a fan of mystery stories; I find them unsatisfying. But in Sayers’ stories the mystery is usually the least important aspect of the book. It’s just a skeleton upon which to hang all sorts of other bits and pieces, like character development and philosophical discussions.
I’ve read a few other mystery writers of that era, such as Agatha Christie and Ngaio Marsh, and while it’s interesting how the same issues come up (Freudian psychology, Bolshevism, and the rise of drugs), it’s also interesting how different Sayers is. If you’ve read one Christie novel, you’ve really read them all. She has the same style and the same love of putting some unbelievable twist at the end. Sayers’ stories are very different from one another both in style and in structure. There isn’t even always a dead body involved.
In this one the murder has happened months before and it’s right at the end of the murder trial. The lawyers are summing up their cases. A mistrial is declared because the jury can’t agree. That’s lucky, because Sir Peter has decided that the girl charged hasn’t done it, even though he has no idea how to prove it. And he also wants to marry her.
Personally I think the solution to this crime is as improbable as any Christie novel, but unlike those stories you can generally see in advance who the baddie is. That doesn’t matter – it’s all the other discussions that are interesting. Relationships between people who weren’t married in the twenties – that’s what makes this story interesting. Marriage in general is a theme, with Wimsy’s sister marrying a mere policeman and his best friend marrying a Jewish woman. Different possibilities for women then, different kinds of relationships. Sayers’ plots hinge on character; that’s what makes them fascinating.
Sayers was obviously a highly intelligent woman. She expects you to know her esoteric references, or at least look them up. She expects you to follow Latin, French and Greek as they come up. She expects you to be interested in ideas and be amused by people’s follies. She does have attitudes of her time which seem archaic, but they are as much historical books as not. What makes her books stand out are her sudden observations which present ideas as clearly as someone would present a chair. You wonder why you’ve never come across it before. An interesting writer, and this is an interesting read.
I’ve read a few other mystery writers of that era, such as Agatha Christie and Ngaio Marsh, and while it’s interesting how the same issues come up (Freudian psychology, Bolshevism, and the rise of drugs), it’s also interesting how different Sayers is. If you’ve read one Christie novel, you’ve really read them all. She has the same style and the same love of putting some unbelievable twist at the end. Sayers’ stories are very different from one another both in style and in structure. There isn’t even always a dead body involved.
In this one the murder has happened months before and it’s right at the end of the murder trial. The lawyers are summing up their cases. A mistrial is declared because the jury can’t agree. That’s lucky, because Sir Peter has decided that the girl charged hasn’t done it, even though he has no idea how to prove it. And he also wants to marry her.
Personally I think the solution to this crime is as improbable as any Christie novel, but unlike those stories you can generally see in advance who the baddie is. That doesn’t matter – it’s all the other discussions that are interesting. Relationships between people who weren’t married in the twenties – that’s what makes this story interesting. Marriage in general is a theme, with Wimsy’s sister marrying a mere policeman and his best friend marrying a Jewish woman. Different possibilities for women then, different kinds of relationships. Sayers’ plots hinge on character; that’s what makes them fascinating.
Sayers was obviously a highly intelligent woman. She expects you to know her esoteric references, or at least look them up. She expects you to follow Latin, French and Greek as they come up. She expects you to be interested in ideas and be amused by people’s follies. She does have attitudes of her time which seem archaic, but they are as much historical books as not. What makes her books stand out are her sudden observations which present ideas as clearly as someone would present a chair. You wonder why you’ve never come across it before. An interesting writer, and this is an interesting read.
posted by Carly at 4:18 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home