Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf
I thought all hat referring to things past wasn't a good idea. Also, the anti-semitism was too much. It didn't need to be.
Quote:
|
And Levy—who was nobody twenty years ago—romps in and carries off Freke’s girl from under his nose. It isn’t the girl Freke would bother about—it’s having his aristocratic nose put out of joint by a little Jewish nobody.
|
That just one example. Saysers didn't have to put it that way. She could have left out the word Jewish and it would still work. [...] |
I would argue that Sayers didn't put it that way, her character did - and this can be an important distinction. The quoted snippet is from a monologue by Lord Peter, and in context the "Jewish nobody" phrase can be see as describing how Freke felt about Levy (rather than Lord Peter or the author felt).
I think the phrases of the Dowager Duchess near the end of chapter 3 were more damning, but again these are the words of a character and seemed to me to be a fairly reasonable portrayal of the times. It would have been entirely unrealistic for such a character to show no prejudice at all. There is also implicit sexism and class prejudice throughout the book - it would be odd if there weren't.
The article linked by astrangerhere does provide an interesting perspective, that there may have been a personal motive for the somewhat mixed presentation of the book, but I'm not sure that is necessary.