Now I Remember...

It only just donned on me why Miss Vane may be reluctant to marry Wimsey. The last man she loved died and she was accused of his murder (this was told at the beginning). In fact, Wimsey is the reason why she is not in jailed—being her lawyer, he won the case, thus freeing her from all liability and the possibility of being hanged. Perhaps she doesn’t believe it appropriate for the two of them to have a relationship because of her past and their business relationship. Then again, it could just be the fact that she wants to remain an independent women or is scared of marriage.

How do resembling characters affect a mystery?

I’m so confused about the character of Lord Saint-George. He is Wimsey’s nephew whom Wimsey must always bail out of trouble and give money to despite the fact that the Wimseys are an aristocratic family. His parents provide him with a meager amount of money while he attends Oxford and thus prompting him to constantly beg Wimsey for money, especially to pay his many debts. Wimsey complies, showing Miss Vane a different side, especially when he pays for Lord Saint-George’s medical bills, which was the result of recklessness. Lord Saint-George constantly acts out to get attention, including making inappropriate gestures with Miss Vane, whom he has recently took to calling an adopted aunt.

So I know that his character helps convey another side to Wimsey and allows Miss Vane into his personal life—one which she took no interest in before—showing a different side of herself as well. At the same time, it’s odd because Miss Vane keeps mentioning how alike they seem. She first met Lord Saint-George, when he bumped into her; she mistook his voice and hands for Wimsey. Now Miss Vane comments that “These family resemblances were unnerving.” It’s odd that she would describe their resemblance as unnerving, suggesting something sinister and dark about the two. (Don’t family members resemble one another?) This leads me to believe that perhaps they are part of the problem and disruption at Shrewsbury College. However, I don’t see how that could be possible considering the fact that Wimsey is in love with Miss Vane and Lord Saint-George doesn’t seem to have any interest in doing such things that don’t involve money or making a scene (of which people know he made the ruckus). At the same time, he has offered valuable information claiming that one day, a woman grab him from behind at night, hoarsely whispering into his ear, which Miss Vane assumes to be the Pen Poisoner. However, Lord Saint-George could be lying since nobody witnessed this encounter and because he told nobody else of this incident in fear of them mocking him. Still, I don’t see how he could be the culprit or be involved.

When mysteries introduce characters that resemble each other or who could have faulty testimony, it always throws people off (keeping the mystery aspect alive). People who look like each other can frame one another as can people with false testimony. Lord Saint-George’s character seems so suspicious to me now because of his similarities to Wimsey (and strange relationship with Miss Vane). Sayers has thoroughly confused me. (She’s must be doing her job!)

What do you think?

I just had another thought about the use of academic settings. Because academic settings are so large and include so many people, the author is able to introduce several characters into the story in order to make it more complex. With so many people in the story, the reader could easily be tricked into thinking that a certain person is the culprit when in reality it is somebody else all along. This heightens both suspense and irony. Also, there are more people to give false testimony and perhaps witness an event but retell a completely different story than another person who claimed to witness the exact same event. This in itself adds another element to the story.

We're getting closer

I have reached another interesting break in the story in which the reader (and Miss Vane) discovers that teacher Miss Hillyard has been walking about on the grounds at night. This makes her appear very suspicious in my eyes, but then again, this may be what Sayers wants me to think. In mysteries, authors deliberately make some characters seem suspicious in order to take suspicious off of other characters and in the process, trick the reader by the time the story is over.

To continue the discussion about academic settings involving intelligent conversation, I am further convinced of this truth because the section I just read involved intelligent discussion between Wimsey and members of the S.C.R. Although there seems to be no further advances in the case, I think there actually is because by Wimsey talking to these women, he may be able to discover the true culprit, especially since many of them are defensive and nervous when speaking with him because he is the “centre of consciousness” because is a “spy.” When their discussion moves to murderers and their punishments, I knew Sayers included this for a reason. Not only is it a chance for Wimsey to “interrogate” the women, but the subject of murderers could foreshadow a possible murder in the future or at the very least suggest the type of punishment the culprit will receive once caught and evaluate the women based on the responses they gave. Many of the women did not “agree that they [murderers] should be comfortably fed and housed” after committing crimes, which is understandable and leads me to believe that the poltergeist will pay for this mayhem that she has caused.

At the same time, these discussions more or less always revert back to the subject of schooling for women, thus reflecting the time period. During this era, many believed, even in Oxford, that “womanliness unfits [a person] from learning.” Obviously, the women in this college are outraged by this line of thought. However, the repetitiveness of this topic leads me to believe that perhaps Miss Vane is correct in believing that the Pen Poisoner is acting out to make a statement about women and perhaps their incompetency to learn at higher institutions of education.

To go back to the novel’s historical significance, this could perhaps be another aspect of academic mystery—it’s academic because it teaches either about a historical time period or perhaps something else. Either way, it’s something to think about.

And the mystery continues...

Oooops. Sorry, I didn’t know I was supposed to be posting my blogs on the main page, but I will do so from now on.

So to continue the story (Gaudy Night), I have finally gotten through a long lull and finally hit some action. Once again this lull involved the “romance” between Miss Vane and Peter Wimsey. He has returned to Oxford and has agreed to assist Miss Vane with her case. They embark on a boat ride together (which is almost always portrayed as romantic), during which Miss Vane becomes flustered by Wimsey, becoming “conscious of his every movement, every page he turned, of every breath he drew,” and Wimsey reveals his “protective” feelings for her. Clearly, they both want a relationship together, so I don’t understand why Miss Vane won’t marry him like he repeatedly asks (but, at this rate, I think she will soon). This theme keeps coming up and it’s starting to get annoying and boring. Will they just marry already and get on with the mystery?? (Or could this perhaps be a mystery in itself?)

Perhaps this is a reason why authors create mysteries in academic settings. It allows for other stories to develop as opposed to solely adhering to a mystery. It allows for downtime and to engage in intellectual conversations, which this book often does, allowing the reader to catch up and learn interesting facts, as well as hold his/her suspense longer. However, at this point, I think the story should hurry up and end, because although I’m still following the story, it is losing my interest since the case never seems to get any further. This is definitely a solvable case.

But at least there was more action again to hold my interest a little bit longer, but of course, like previous times, the culprit wasn’t apprehended, but instead escaped in the nick of time, since she had locked the door from inside and was able to escape from the one window that happened to be unlocked. Still this “encounter” with the culprit shows promise since Wimsey has arrived and since Miss Vane and Wimsey were able to identify a possible person as the culprit—Miss DeVine, because black hair pins, of which only she wears, were left at the crime scene.

At this scene, this person was making more anonymous letters and creating more ways to spark more mayhem. The next letter was intended for Miss Vane, but it was never finished and the characters never explained what little the note said. What did the poltergeist want to say to Miss Vane? This is just another ploy to hold my interest, but it’s working.