This is the second Sayers I've read (and reviewed) in two weeks, the other being 'Strong Poison'. My response is similar to 'Strong Poison': expertly written, interesting characters and absorbing enough to keep me reading throughout the day (in this case during the two halves of a lengthy return train journey). But as a novel of detection, surprisingly weak. Moreso indeed than 'Strong Poison'. This is a non-Peter Whimsey novel written in collaboration with Robert Eustace, a medical scientist leant his imagination and expert knowledge to other authors, particularly L T Meade for a number of highly enjoyable Edwardian pulp series such as 'Notes from the Diary of a Doctor' and 'Adventures of a Man of Science'.The first part of the book sets out the characters and the scenario which ultimately leads to murder. This is by far the most successful section and is presented in a series of letters and statements from the protagonists. What made this particularly interesting is the widely different interpretations created by the mindsets of the individuals. This is all very insightful. Sayers also weaves in a number of preoccupations of the middle classes in 1929, including fashion, 'modern' art and literature and its supposed immorality and the theories of that radical new scientist Albert Einstein. I enjoyed this period detail.Just like in 'Strong Poison', once the murder is committed, a likely suspect is soon presented and the rest of the book is not a whodunnit but a howdunnit (and a howtoproveit). Unfortunately, the clue stood out fairly obviously and the means of establishing the proof is so technical that it takes two pages of tedious text to explain it (and I'm not sure it's even good science by today's standards). Sayers also gets distracted by questions on the meaning of life and introduces a clunky discourse between the main protagonist, a bunch of handily assembled scientists and a clergyman in order to explore this abstruse subject. Maybe this was more interesting in the 1920s/30s but it felt not only out of place but dull and a thoroughly unnecessary delay before the in itself underwhelming denouement.So, overall 'The Documents' is disappointing as detective fiction but remains an insightful series of character studies despite that. It's an oddity. However, despite my reservations I'm still sufficiently intrigued by Sayers's reputation and possibilities in Lord Peter Wimsey that I'm determined to read more. I've just been lucky enough to pick up in a charity shop (for 50p!) an old Omnibus edition of three Wimsey novels I've not read yet so I'll definitely be pursuing this line of inquiry in the near future.
Considering this was in the 1001 Books to Read Before You Die list, I was not struck with its uniqueness. Telling a story entirely in documents and letters is not groundbreaking now, although in 1930 it may have been. Having just read a book of letters, these come across as far too verbose and writerly, and the statements filled with asides and inner thoughts just seem unlikely. However, Sayers has the gift of subtlety and quiet humour that infuse her characters with definite qualities - likeable or unlikeable - and allow us to get really stuck into the story. The awful Miss Milsom, the unpleasant Mr Harrison and his equally prejudiced son, the cheeky and opinionated Mr Munting, all these characters are beautifully drawn and the kind of characters of whom definite opinions can be formed; this is a blessed relief in a world where character is being sacrificed for plot ever more frequently and ambivalence about characters has become the norm. Mrs Harrison presents a problem - Sayers as a woman writer in the 20s and 30s must have come across rampant sexism on a daily basis, in newspapers and in publishing and in simple everyday conversation. It is problematic to me that she wrote this book from an all-male perspective, as I can't tell where the quietly comic digging at the male ego ends and the internalised women-as-subordinate attitude begins. The catalyst for the crime is never clearly pronounced - did the faithless wife plant the seed of malice in her lover's heart? Or was she too passive and reflective? Considering Sayers' unsympathetic portrayal of the husband, was she justifying the affair? Or condemning the faithlessness of women? Perhaps the perspective indicates her impression of the overall perspective of men - that women may be the cause of all woe in their lives, but aren't important enough to have clearly resolved motives or stories.All in all, I would much rather read a Harriet Vane-centric story; now there was a female voice worth reading!
Do You like book The Documents In The Case (1995)?
I didn't realize, before I started, that this is not a Peter Wimsey mystery. Actually, I really enjoyed it, after I'd figured out the difference. It's a collaboration between Sayers and one Robert Eustace—does anybody know anything about the nature of the collaboration? I found the intelligent, talented, but above all middle class (for want of a better term) characters quite refreshing and engaging, even the whacko ones. I also found the conceit of the novel's construction, as a collection of do
—Elizabeth
I love, love, love this book. It was a complete surprise, and not a novel I ever would have picked up on my own - it was bought for me as a teenager (that would be approximately two decades ago!) and something I put aside for years because at the time I'd never heard of Sayers. I read the back and thought "well *that* sounds dull!" And then one day I picked it up, read a few pages... and finished it the same day! Oh, the gift that books like that are to a reader! I could not now say how many times I've read the book, and I delight in it each time. I love the characters, and this was my first experience with an epistolary novel - and I love that style! The story behind it all was good as well, interesting, and though the murder is revealed in a slower, somewhat less dramatic fashion than traditional murder mysteries, I was not disappointed - rather I admired the way it was done, in a cold, clinical way, quite the opposite of the usual "dramatic last moment reveal in a small group full of people which naturally includes the murderer." I'm rather disappointed that Sayers didn't write more like this, because I have found that I cannot stand her usual detective, Wimsey.
—Tarma
The plot of this book is so smart that it actually figured as a problem in one of my organic chemistry textbooks in college! One of those musty dusty tomes but still!!!The brilliance of the science aside, it is truly an excellent book! Dorothy Sayers is a master at creating three dimensional characters that live and breathe. The book is written in an epistolary format and most incidents come across from two or more points of view, each so consistent and complete by itself that that alone would be reason enough to read this book. How does she get the characters, their voice, what they say and think and feel so right every time?You can see what's coming from the start of course but that will in no way impair your enjoyment of the book, at least not unless you are looking for nothing more or less than a whodunit. Like all of Dorothy Sayers' novels, this is a book that does not see why it shouldn't be a 'real book' (in Lord Peter Wimsey's words) just because it is a mystery novel. Great read.
—Somyaiyer
