Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
In some ways, I thought the Great War flashback to be most interesting because otherwise the war was like the dog who didn't bark in the night. [...]
I think it's possible to take the references to Jews and, implied, gays as either and both a marker of the times and somewhat subversive. In fact, I think Sayers might just have been striving for the sensational; the whole business was rather over-the-top.
|
The "dog who didn't bark in the night" thing might equally well be applied to Christie's earlier novels, the
Poirot novels in particular. Given their setting, the war played a very small part in most of the stories and was of little more than incidental background even when it was mentioned. Aside from escapism, I wonder if there was also an element of there being quite enough having been said about the war already, without adding any more than absolutely necessary.
I do think it is possible to read various possible motives behind what Sayers wrote. The anti-semitic views attributed to Freke fit that character and his motives for murder, but the views expressed by the Dowager Duchess (in particular) seemed over-the-top (but were they really?) and stood out as being out of place (but is that a lack of understanding on my part?). It seemed like Sayers was trying to say something, but the choice of character for those views makes it unclear what was intended.
As to it being implied that Lord Peter was gay ... I guess it's possible, but I'm not convinced. There's not really enough in just this one book to work out what Sayers put in place merely for a particular effect, and what was deliberate statement of character or idea. In fact, take away the belated preface and you would be left guessing about a great many things concerning Lord Peter.