Good evening- I am a Dorothy L. Sayers fan, having read everything I could find. I read "Thrones, Dominations" and was very disappointed. I was given "A Presumption of Death" by a friend who know of my devotion to Sayers. Just as with "Thrones..." it is a disapointment. Sayers books may be period pieces, however, she has excellent character development and the young lady who is takeup the mantel lacks that skill. In short-don't waste the $24.
it has to be hard to write period pieces when one didn't live in that period. that's one of the reasons i don't read the "new" holmes stories. i didn't even realize there was a new wimsey novel. wasn't the whole point of "thrones, dominations" to finish an incomplete novel? what is the excuse for a new one? i found ya'lls conversation about the racism and pseudo-intellectualism interesting. the latin does get dense. i thought is was just me not understanding it lol. otherwise i really like the wimsey novels. christie seems to have the same problems with race, or nationalism anyway. heaven knows, the majority of characters despise americans. but calling these writers racist without taking into account the era they were written in stikes me as the same argument for banning huck finn etc. from school libraries. (watch it stikeforce, your southern, liberal tendancies are showing :) try being a southern liberal, talk about HARD going... rotflmao
I may be joining this discussion rather late but I do feel the need to respond to some of the comments made here. First, the point that DLS is boring, with overstrung plotlines from little foundations. Nevermind that this is an astonishing achievement in itself, but the devil is in the detail. Meticulously built-up and never irrelevant. True the pace is slow at times, but deliberately so, it makes you slow down when reading it, and savour the process.
Next, the supposed pretenciousness. Yes, maybe she is a little, particularly with the quotes she starts her chapters with or some of the assumptions she presumes her readers to go along with her on. But her audience at the time thought nothing strange of affected about this. It says someting more about our own generation's drawbacks in certain regards. And above all else, is not her erudition justified by her own deservingness of it - she put the work in, shame to waste the effort by hiding it.
The race relations business is rather vague and obscure in referances above, and is not something I recall taking away from the novels after reading them. I do recall someting about Jews and money-lenders but this is so common-place for the time that it is barely worth remarking on. Besides, when one comes to Sayers, one expects the dialogue to hold centre-place - if it is the characters having the discussions and making the disparaging comments, DLS is reprting them, not saying such things herself. Treat it as a document of the time.
The comments on her portrayal of women have already been answered.
She is not a whodunit writer but she never tries to be, setting out along a different path. The interest is in the means, or the motive, not the actual villain, who is usually obvious. This is a different kind of puzzle, and one often neglected by other writers. Celebrate the diversity!
Boy, did I go off on one there...
has anyone noticed that lord peter wimsey is rather likme the scarlet pimpernel?
Actually yes, he is a bit like the scarlet pimpernel. People see him as a silly excentric nobleman and not as the intelligent creature he is.
I'm usually not that fond of reading detective stories, but Dorothy L. Sayers has become one of my favourite authors. I suppose it's because her novels aren't just about the crime and how to solve a case. It's the characters I find interesting.
Hello! My name is Yuliya and I stopped by to ask a question. I haven't read any of Sayers' books but heard many good things, so I decided to try to listen to them. Our library network has 3 different copies of Whose Body? - narrated by Nadia May, Roe Kendall, and David Case. Some other books from the series are narrated by Ian Carmichael; possibly , there are other narrators as well. Does anyone have an opinion on whose narrating is better?
Also, should the books be read in the order they were written or is any other order better? Thanks.
yuliya, (boy this is a late answer LOL)the harriet vane stories should DEFINETLY be read in order. i don't listen to books on tape so i have no idea about that. and kattt, i always thought it was a shame lesley howard didn't play wimsey, he looked just like wimsey's description:)
I am during a presentation for my British Lit class and i basicly need to be Dorothy Sayers for the class and tell eveyone about me how would you present this.