Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
What we're reading

Find your new favourite book or recommend one on our Book forum.

Original poster

Dorothy Sayers' Whimsey novels - do you know the (1980s) TV adaptations?

366 replies

JeanneDeMontbaston · 10/01/2015 11:33

I wasn't sure where to put this thread, but it feels as if it'd be more at home here that the TV threads. I love Dorothy Sayers. MN introduced me to her. I wish they'd do another adaptation, but the 1980s ones are surprisingly good.

The wonderful sconerhymeswithgone showed me the existence of these on youtube. (The link is to Gaudy Night, because that's what I'm watching, but there are lots of earlier ones).

What do you think? I liked the casting, but I have quibbles. And the ending to Gaudy Night is a travesty, right?

OP posts:
YonicSleighdriver · 11/01/2015 23:12

Ah, that makes sense Irene. IMO, the Real Villain was hoping that the death would never be investigated.

IrenetheQuaint · 11/01/2015 23:11

One can't reread Gaudy Night too much! I always read the prologue to Busman's Honeymoon immediately afterwards; I'm not a fan of Busman's Honeymoon generally and have only read it once or twice but absolutely love the Dowager Duchess's descriptions of Harriet and Peter's engagement and wedding.

LadyPeterWimsey · 11/01/2015 23:08

Nothing to add atm but just wanted to say:

I have found my people!

You have made me re-read Gaudy Night this afternoon in between cooking for multitudes, just for the utter pleasure of watching Harriet and Peter again. Now I'm going to bed with the last few chapters.

IrenetheQuaint · 11/01/2015 23:08

Yonic - yes, I wonder! I came to the tentative conclusion that the earlier illness episodes were the villain trying to establish a pattern of gastric illness for Philip Boyes, but they're never actually explained. Plus there is some weirdness with a water jug as well.

I don't think the villain would have known that Harriet was researching arsenic poisoning and had actually bought some arsenic, which was the killer point in the trial.

PetulaGordino · 11/01/2015 23:07

Jeanne I think that is one of the many reasons why I couldn't write a novel - I would be too obsessive about things like that whereas many brilliant writers just don't seem to get hung up on it so the timelines are somewhat flexible?

RustyBear · 11/01/2015 23:03

The Harriet/Boyes timeline is in the judge's summing up in the first chapter of Strong Poison - they met 'at some time in the year 1927', in March 1928 'the prisoner 'gave in and consented to live on terms of intimacy with him, outside the bonds of marriage'. They quarrelled and separated in February 1929, Boyes had various 'gastric attacks' over the next few months, the last one on the 20th June and he died on the morning of the 23rd.

YonicSleighdriver · 11/01/2015 23:01

BTW, has anyone ever wondered if the Real Villain in SP actually intended to frame HV? And what all the earlier illness epsiodes were about?

YonicSleighdriver · 11/01/2015 23:00

They may have been in the relationship longer (and I don't think they necessarily met immediately after Oxford) - Harriet's parents died when she was 23. But they lived together on 'good terms' for a year, I think. Then I guess they were split up for several months before he died and several months after was the trial.

Original poster
JeanneDeMontbaston · 11/01/2015 23:00

Ah, sorry, cross-posting.

I am very glad I don't ever have to plot a novel.

OP posts:
Original poster
JeanneDeMontbaston · 11/01/2015 22:58

No, but the trial is some time before Gaudy Night, so it could work out, couldn't it?

OP posts:
RustyBear · 11/01/2015 22:57

Though I think Yonic is right about the reference to her 32nd birthday, which means either DLS changed her age, either deliberately or in error or the judge got her age wrong!

I have a vague memory of some reference to Peter being 14 years older, but I may be thinking of Roderick Alleyn and Troy, who I think had a similar age-gap.

IrenetheQuaint · 11/01/2015 22:57

Yes, I thought 10 years younger than Peter.

Nine Tailors happens between Have His Carcase and Gaudy Night, doesn't it? There's a brief ref to it in Gaudy Night, near the beginning - Peter takes Harriet out for dinner and tells her about it soon after it's happened.

Original poster
JeanneDeMontbaston · 11/01/2015 22:55

Is it only a year?!

I can't do timelines, I just didn't have that space of emotional time in my head.

OP posts:
RustyBear · 11/01/2015 22:53

Harriet was 29 at the time of her trial (the judge says so in his summing-up) and the trial takes place just before Christmas 1929, so presumably she was born in 1900 and was 10 years younger than Peter.

YonicSleighdriver · 11/01/2015 22:52

She lived with Boyes for a year.

There's a brilliant timeline somewhere (which concludes the opening section of Nine Tailors overlaps with Miss Climpson's seance efforts) but it's in my Kindle which is currently lost!

Original poster
JeanneDeMontbaston · 11/01/2015 22:50

Thanks, rusty!

petula - yes, must be. She would have graduated at 21/22 and we know she was with thingy for two or three years, then was on trial six months after he died.

OP posts:
YonicSleighdriver · 11/01/2015 22:50

IN Gaudy Night, isn't her 32nd birthday a matter of months away,. or some such phrasing, around the Pomfret incident?

Original poster
JeanneDeMontbaston · 11/01/2015 22:49

Not sure, but maybe Jack Ellis for Bunter? I've never seen him do the smooth, Butler-ish side of it all, but I think Bunter meant to be someone who is good at chatting up women and getting along with men over a pint (which is the bit of RM's Bunter that was totally implausible!). And we're not meant to think he was trained up as a valet, are we? I think he just attached himself to Peter after the war.

OP posts:
RustyBear · 11/01/2015 22:48

In Paul Delgardie's biography at the end of most of the books, it says Peter went up to Oxford in 1909 after spending a couple of years in Paris with Uncle Paul. Which would mean he would finish a 3-year degree in the summer of 1912, just 23 years before the punt trip.

ZeroFunDame · 11/01/2015 22:47

Slow typing! I rather liked Uncle Paul's reminiscences. (Though they perhaps had a slight air of the Marquis de Sade ...)

PetulaGordino · 11/01/2015 22:46

i have it in my head that there were 5-7 or so years between HV and LPW meeting and their getting married, is that right? If so she was prob mid-20s when they first met?

ZeroFunDame · 11/01/2015 22:44

Mmm ... But her looks are not what she trades in. (HV, not the actress.) Harriet Walter is HV for me. If Ms Hall had the part she might have to give the character a slightly different slant.

SconeRhymesWithGone · 11/01/2015 22:42

It may seem an odd choice, but I'd like to see Pauline Collins as the dowager.

Original poster
JeanneDeMontbaston · 11/01/2015 22:40

Well, I suppose he's 'ancient' to be perving over Harriet, though!

I have to say, I think he's one of Sayers' really crap characters. I hate getting to the end of the book and thinking I have a nice thick 5-6 pages left, to find it's his wittering on.

OP posts:
YonicSleighdriver · 11/01/2015 22:37

It pisses me off actually when Uncle Paul is referred to as 'indecently ancient' as he's the Dowager's brother!

Swipe left for the next trending thread