#Gaudy Night

[leojurand]

going back to this scene for no reason. they don't write men like this anymore

[m-a-salter]

Period Drama Appreciation Week 2024 | Day 2: Favorite Character | Edward Petherbridge as Lord Peter Wimsey in Dorothy L. Sayers Mysteries (1987)

[thesarahshay]

Thinking about her (the 9-year-old girl from Gaudy Night who says "I don't want a husband, I'd rather have a motorcycle").

[o-uncle-newt]

OK I've talked here, I think, about my strong belief that we need a Miss Climpson's Cattery TV show to jump on the mystery period drama bandwagon- and I've been thinking about what it might look like and have some ideas

Please feel free to add some in comments or reblogs!

The overall cast structure is basically like Call the Midwife S1 (or, more accurately, S2-3)- we have a POV "new to the crew" character who is purportedly the main character (but significantly lower-drama than Jenny lol) but it's functionally an ensemble. Miss Climpson is the Sister Julienne character, aka the on-the-ground boss, and then there are a bunch of other operatives, who all show up at SOME point in most episodes but only a few of them take center stage each episode in a particular case or two. There are also the support staff/actual typists, who are fun side characters.

Wimsey is a side character, and is played by a non-super-famous actor. He only appears in a few episodes at most in each season, usually as someone who is giving work to the operatives. While he can bring in operatives to help him on his cases, he is never allowed to solve any agency cases.

Harriet is a one or two episode max character. She meets Miss Climpson and possibly Miss Murchison but nobody else (as discussed in Gaudy Night). Honestly, if they don't show her that's fine too. At most she's brought in to provide help/insight on a literary world case.

The show starts right after the events of Strong Poison, and it's discussed as a recent case among the team. That said, unless it can be fit canonically into a Sayers story without undue bother, the episodes do NOT circle around existing Sayers plots.

Miss Murchison is a significant character, and has a love interest to whom she gets married sometime toward the third/fourth year of show canon (as we know that canonically she gets married sometime before the events of Gaudy Night). It is a cute older-nerd romance and everyone ships it. There is no "drama," just sweetness.

This is optional, but it is POSSIBLE that Wimsey brings Miss Meteyard into the firm, likely not permanently but possibly on a one-case basis for her advertising world expertise. She is initially snobbish about it but soon grows out of it.

As I've alluded to above, the main rule is- Sayers canon can never be violated. There is SO much space for great story and characterization that falls totally in line.

Everything else... is totally up to whoever! And I'm absolutely up for other ideas! These are just the main things I've thought of and I may come back and make additions/edits but here we go for now.

Though... casting idea- I'm not usually very good at this but I really feel like, speaking of Call the Midwife, Georgie Glen (Miss Higgins) could be an interesting Miss Climpson. Quite different than the excellent one in the Petherbridge/Walter adaptation of Strong Poison, but still good. I'm completely open to other suggestions though, as well as casting suggestions for other characters (including just actors who you think would be good for random currently-nonexistent/hypothesized ones- it's just so open ended, there are so many choices!).

[j-august]

"The trouble is," said the Librarian, "that everybody sneers at restrictions and demands freedom, till something annoying happens; then they demand angrily what has become of the discipline."

Dorothy L. Sayers, Gaudy Night

[fearofgodandtolkien]

Dorothy Sayers was so relatable when she wrote a love interest for her main character, then realized that they couldn't get together at the end of the book because the main's character development wasn't finished yet, so she made two more books where the premise was the two of them bantering their way about a murder and then let them get married. and then threw another murder at em for funsies

[estellaestella]

Just in case you thought New Phone, Who Dis? is a new joke, this is from GAUDY NIGHT, a book that came out in 1935, roughly in the infancy of the telephone.

[skyriderwednesday]

Finished Gaudy Night. Let me assure you that the only reason I'm not screaming is that it's quarter past midnight and my parents are sleeping.

[skarabrae-stone]

I just re-read Gaudy Night, and it's interesting how it feels very relevant and very dated at the same time. There's so much discussion about a woman's "place" and whether a woman can (or should) still have an intellectual life/job outside her husband if she's married, and it seems like many of the academic women in the story feel on some level that they have to choose one or the other. On the one hand, this debate, again, feels very dated in an era where most women do have jobs regardless of whether they're married or not. On the other hand, women still are frequently expected to put their families before their jobs, while men are usually not; and women are still frequently expected to sacrifice their own careers and interests for the sake of their families, while men are usually not.

The "question" of whether women belong in academia no longer seems to be a question in mainstream culture, but women in academia still don't get the same amount of respect or opportunities as men. And while British and American society no longer demands that unmarried women remain celibate, I think there is still a great deal of discomfort at the idea of women who choose to remain single, and with the idea of voluntary celibacy in general.

It's also interesting that the Senior Members of the college (all women) seem to more or less jump to the conclusion that the college "poltergeist" is expressing some kind of psycho-sexual frustration born of celibacy and academic isolation, when in fact it's someone seeking revenge. It seems like even though these women have been in academia/running the college for decades, they still harbor some insecurity over the legitimacy of their profession and lifestyle.

And then, of course, there are the casual mentions of eugenics and the one woman who thinks execution is wrong and that murderers should be used for scientific experiments instead (because that's more humane somehow??). There's also the instance where one of the porters (who is otherwise very likeable) says that Britain needs "a Hitler" who will put women in their proper place. Interesting times...

Idk, Gaudy Night fascinates me because there's SO MUCH going on in it that even on my second read, I think there's a lot that I'm probably missing. The various philosophical debates in it make me really curious about what Dorothy Sayers' own views were.

[buttered-toast-and-sentiment]

gaudy night (summarized):

[leojurand]

i just finished gaudy night and am amazed by the way dorothy sayers was able to pull off a romance that is an instalove for peter and a slowburn for harriet. except it kind of is a slowburn for peter too, because he had to learn the way he was trying to love harriet was selfish and childish. but wow, not only is peter/harriet an amazing couple almost impossible not to root for, they have such a fascinating dynamic that goes beyond the label of 'romance', believable conflict that makes it more complex and compelling, and a female character that can't simply be called love interest because that would be insulting to who she is and her role in the story.

like there's so much to them. and it's all so good. love when authors can actually write!!

[fromthedeskofcripslock]

Oh Gaudy Night…DL Sayers, you cannot put a declaration of love and a horrifyingly prescient academic discussion of 1930s European attitudes towards healthcare for the mentally ill within two pages of each other. My heart can’t take this.

[thesarahshay]

You've heard that Dorothy Sayers named Beatrice Wilson, the sassy little girl in Gaudy Night, after the wife of her baby daddy who helped her have the child in secret

Now get ready for the fact that she also named Mary Attwood (née Stokes), Harriet's old school chum who she spends the whole gaudy talking shit about, after the woman John Cournos married after he refused to marry Sayers 😮

[hailingsweetpotatoes]

Thing #199,567 I love about the Lord Peter Wimsey novels

People who are already horny for a particular kind of hands get to gradually fall in love with Peter for other reasons across nine books before getting to Gaudy Night and realizing HE HAS THOSE HANDS and Harriet is WITH YOU ON THIS.

[o-uncle-newt]

We don't talk enough about the Petherbridge/Walter adaptations of the Wimsey/Vane novels.

(Well, we probably talk EXACTLY enough about Gaudy Night, which is really pretty bad, but besides for that...)

(Sorry, just a warning, Richard Morant as Bunter is fine but I won't have much to say about him here. I just really like this picture.)

The casting is basically perfect, especially Harriet Walter as Harriet Vane. I no longer see the book character in any other way- the only notable difference is that in the book she's noted as having a deep voice, but Walter's has a distinctive enough tone that I think it works regardless. She is just so, so, so good- captures the character beautifully, sells everything she does whether mundane or ridiculous (probably the best/most realistic reaction of someone finding a body I have EVER seen in Have His Carcase), makes the most of every limited minute she's on screen in Strong Poison and leaves her mark every minute that she isn't... and she looks AMAZING doing all of it. Just perfect, could not imagine better casting.

Edward Petherbridge I don't hold up to that level of perfection- I think that, try as he might, he's not really able to capture Wimsey's dynamism (possibly because he's a bit too old for the role) and is a bit overly caricatured in many of his mannerisms. But overall he does a pretty good job, in addition to looking quite a lot like how I'd imagined Wimsey- but in particular, I think he does a really lovely job of selling a lot of the emotion that he has to convey in some scenes that feel like they SHOULDN'T be adaptable from the book- specifically the scenes of him and Harriet. Him proposing to Harriet, him being disappointed when she (completely reasonably) turns him down... those shouldn't work on screen with real humans rather than in Sayers's calculated prose, but it DOES work and in no small part because he's great at selling Wimsey's feelings as being genuine even when his actions seem over the top. And, of course, Harriet Walter sells her end of the scenes right back. All in all, I think I have mixed feelings about Petherbridge as Lord Peter Wimsey the detective, but I'm a fan of him as Peter, the man who has feelings for Harriet.

Overall, though, both are, I think, very successful in capturing these characters- the fact that they take these people who even in the book can sometimes push the boundaries of likeability (which to be clear, is part of what I love about reading them) and make them eminently watchable is a great achievement. And also, in addition to their really looking like their characters individually, they're very well matched as a pair in the way that one pictures them from the book. They're even of very similar height and build, which we know is canonically true from Gaudy Night, and thus at least a somewhat relevant element of their dynamic.

Now, the adaptations are very uneven, and that's even without talking about Gaudy Night because, while it has about as good a rendition of the punting scene as I think we were ever going to get, most of the rest of it is crap and massively expands on what I think are serious problems to Peter and Harriet's relationship that the series as a whole had (not to mention cutting the character of St George, which is a travesty). None of the adaptations are perfect, and mess with aspects of their relationship in negative ways- for example, the ending of Strong Poison is exactly backward in a really awful way. I'll get back to this.

But when the show gets the two of them right, it gets them RIGHT, even when it's adapting Sayers's text/creating new dialogue. There are scenes in this one that I love almost as much as the canon text, like this one:

I don't think any of this is in the book, and there are things that happen here that I don't think Sayers would have ever written. But at the same time, a combination of the dialogue and the actors makes it COMPLETELY believable as these two people, and it captures a moment that is just really key for Peter as he faces his limitations and his feelings- something that in the book is conveyed through a lot of internal narrative on Peter's part that would be impossible to adapt as is, but that in the world of the show needed to happen in a much more visual and narrative way. Not all of the dialogue that this series chooses to fill in those gaps works, but even when it doesn't the actors do their best to sell the heck out of it, and when the dialogue DOES work it is seriously brilliant.

Probably my favorite of the adaptations is Have His Carcase, and scenes like this one are a big part of the reason why:

They change the location, but otherwise it's EXTRAORDINARILY faithful to the equivalent scene in the book, and honestly it shouldn't have worked with real people doing it and yet it does. It's just acted perfectly, given just enough arch and silly humor (particularly with the spinning door) that we don't attempt to take it too seriously, while also conveying the relevant emotions so well. The actors in the scene through only their faces and ways of speaking convey subtext that Sayers, in the book, conveyed a lot later on as actual text in the characters' thoughts, and there's something pretty great about that.

Other Have His Carcase scenes are less good (the dance scene is mediocre at best, I think), but if there's another Have His Carcase scene that I think illustrates how great Walter and Petherbridge are at selling the human sides of their characters, it's That Argument- seen here:

The Argument is a pale imitation of that in the book- the one in the book is, in fact, probably unadaptable as is- but it is still just so good because the actors are so good at selling it. Walter is just brilliant in the role and utterly inhabits it while also imbuing it with her own spin, and makes us feel Harriet's pain- and Petherbridge, through some relatively subtle facial expressions and reactions, is able just as well to make US understand what all of this means to him and how he feels. It's actually really remarkable that, just like how Sayers writes a relationship dynamic that only feels like it works because she's the one who wrote it that very specific way, this scene feels like it only works because these two actors play it in this specific way. Could two other actors do it? Very possibly, but it would feel super different and I wonder if it would feel this authentic. (I do want to note though that this scene made me really wish that we'd seen a Frasier-era David Hyde Pierce in the role of a younger and spryer, but equally posh, witty, and vulnerable, Wimsey. It just gave me vibes of something that he'd do beautifully.)

Now, as I said above, this doesn't get EVERYTHING right. In fact, quite a lot of their relationship ends up going pretty wrong- as I think a major mistake is their throughline which emphasizes Peter's continued pursuit of Harriet as not just reiterating his interest to make it clear that he hasn't changed his mind, but actively taking advantage of moments and situations in a romantic sense, taking a much more specific role in engaging with her physically, commenting on her appearance, saying how difficult it is for him to NOT pursue her more, etc. It makes the whole thing feel a lot more cat-and-mouse rather than a budding relationship of equals, and one where Peter acknowledges the whole time that they HAVE to be equals for a) Harriet to feel comfortable with him and b) them to be good together. In fact, however good the Argument above is, it's kind of undercut by this very pattern- he makes the book's point about him treating his feelings like something out of a comic opera, but he also at that point in the story has had a few much more oppressively serious scenes with her that clearly make her uncomfortable- nothing like anything in a comic opera. It's like the show misses the point a little.

I think the place where this really starts is at the end of Strong Poison. (I could see an argument to be made that it starts earlier, in a few smaller nuances of their jailhouse scenes, but I like those enough that I choose not to read into them too much lol.) After what I think is a great addition to the final jailhouse scene (one that I loved so much I repurposed it for a fic)- "it's supposed to be about love, isn't it" and some excellent reactions from Petherbridge- Harriet goes to court, her charges are dismissed, and unlike in the book, when it's Wimsey who leaves first (which Eiluned and Sylvia point out is a sign of his decency in not waiting for Harriet to thank him), here Wimsey is the one who watches as Harriet rejects him and walks away from him- the beginning of the chase. But nothing about their relationship is meant to be a chase! It's so frustrating to watch as that proceeds to be a continuing issue to a limited degree in Have His Carcase (where it's at least balanced by enough good moments that it doesn't matter so much) and to a MASSIVE, genuinely uncomfortable degree in Gaudy Night.

The only praise I will give it is that while the punt scene in the book is unfilmable, I think this adaptation did its best here and it's pretty good.

I'm not going to spend much time talking about Gaudy Night otherwise, because I'd need all day for it and also I'd probably need to rewatch it to make sure I get the details right and I have zero interest in doing that, but the way that it has Wimsey imposing himself and his feelings/hopes on Harriet to a really ridiculous degree, in a way that he never, ever does in the book, is just so so discomfiting and makes me feel terrible for Harriet. She doesn't deserve that. If I recall correctly, in that scene at the dance at the beginning, she's so happy just being with him and then he's all "oh so this means you want to marry me" and she just droops. He's so aggressive!

And that's what makes the worst part so bad, because not only does this miniseries not depict Wimsey's apology as the book does- one of the best scenes in a book full of brilliant scenes- it would actually be weird if it did, because this show doesn't imply that there's ANYTHING for Wimsey to be apologizing for! In fact, unlike in the books where we see Wimsey growing and deconstructing the parts of himself that had been demanding of Harriet, in the series we only see him get more demanding- until finally he wins. It's honestly infuriating and I hate it- the actors do their best to sell it (and apparently they were given bad enough material that they actually had to rewrite some of it themselves, though I have mixed feelings about the results) but it is just massively disappointing. Basically the whole emotional journey between the two of them is not just neutered but twisted.

For all of my criticisms of the adaptations' all around approach to their relationship, I do have to reiterate- Walter and Petherbridge do a wonderful, wonderful job. (Especially Walter.) When they're given good material to work with, and even often when they aren't, they are able to sell it so well- and particularly in the case of Walter, I genuinely can't think of the character as anyone but her rendition now. She IS Harriet Vane for me. And, for all the flaws that the series has, that's something pretty dang special.

Anyway, for anyone who read through this whole thing and hasn't seen these adaptations, I DO recommend Strong Poison and Have His Carcase- but not Gaudy Night unless you're either really curious or a glutton for punishment. The first two, though, have very good supporting casts, are quite faithful plot wise (sometimes to a fault- another flaw is that they are really devoted to conveying the whole mystery with all its clues sometimes to the point of dragginess, but will drop sideplots like, for example, Parker and Mary- which is totally reasonable, but still vaguely disappointing as those sideplots tend to add some levity/characterization), and just generally are an overall good time. (Some standout characters for me are Miss Climpson in Strong Poison and Mrs Lefranc in Have His Carcase.) And, of course, the best part is seeing the little snippets of Peter and Harriet that come through- less so their journey, vs in the book where that's central, but so many scenes where we just see the two of them together as they are in that moment and it's so satisfying.

[camilla-denniston]

What are you to do with the people who are cursed with both hearts and brains?

Dorothy L. Sayers