Dorothy L. Sayers was a snob of the highest order, and not at all my cup of tea. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing wrong with authors who are antiquated in style (Proust, one of my homeboys) or problematic (Woody Allen's comedy) or indeed high-and-mighty, antiquated, and problematic (my bookshelf is a shrine to Lawrence Durrell) but something about Sayers puts me off.

Is it her half-page epigraphs at the commencement of each chapter? Her rambling style? Her characters' proclivity to burst into Latin without a footnote, even in a modern edition (not necessarily a problem for a classicist such as myself, but still annoying)? Or the sheer audacity of a 520-page mystery novel? I mean, even at their best, these things - whether by Christie, Marsh, Tey, or Innes - were designed to be amusements to pass the time, not Tolstoy. Perhaps it's Harriet Vane's unwillingness to really get involved in solving the mystery, and leaving it up to her bf.

Either way, I didn't enjoy Sayers in highschool and I still don't care for Gaudy Night but I appreciate that - much like my willingness to get lost in Pym or Zola - for some, Sayers fits their heart and soul specifically. I'll stick to the other Golden Age crime writers, thanks. (Delectable speech by the non-murderer at the end, though!) ( )

A beautifully crafted story, weaving together Sayers trademark mystery writing with the love story of Peter and Harriet, a deep understanding of Oxford, and insights into the role of women in society. It feels like it was the book Sayers was waiting to write, more personal than her earlier mystery novels. ( )

A very intellectually dense mystery. The author includes many references to Latin, Greek and British literature within the witty banter regarding a "poison pen" at Oxford.
While interesting, it made for slow reading. The references did not move the story along, rather the opposite. It did prove that a) The author was an intellectual snob, b) so were her characters.
That being said, it did make a case for early feminism, via the "Life of the Mind".....a brilliant mind is worth developing, even if it resides in a female (or other less respected human being).
Although it was considered very progressive for the time,it hasn't aged well. ( )

This was my first Dorothy Sayers novel, and I have to say I am a bit in love with Lord Peter Whimsey. What I found very interesting about this novel was its treatment of men and women, and the insightful ways that Sayers explores their thoughts and actions. Peter Whimsey is one of a few token males in this book, and the rest of the characters are mostly women of academic standing at a college in Oxford. They are all developed very well, as is the heroine Harriet Vane. I don't know that I have ever met another character who is as clear headed, emotionally aware, and downright savage as Harriet Vane. If you're going to read it, I recommend starting with Strong Poison and Have His Carcase. ( )

If I had picked the books for the 1001 Books lists, I would have chosen this book first from this series, I think.
This is a story about a woman very much like the marginally educated Conservatives who vote for and blindly support political men like Donald Trump, and the lengths she would go to to destroy the modern world that she sees as responsible for her husband's poor choices and unfortunate end. This book takes on the issue of women's education and the role of women in society. The story is set in the 1930's as tensions are building on the Continent, and with the effects of Great Depression and WW1 launching more women into roles seen for generations as suitable only for men. Harriet gets to do most of the sleuthing herself in this book, too, while Peter is away dealing with international relations in France and Poland.

In this book, too, it is mentioned that Peter is 45yrs old. He always seems older to me, but he's not actually all that old after all. ( )