The Documents in the Case - Dorothy L. Sayers - SPOILER Thread

[Susan]

Published in 1930, this is an epistolary crime novel by Dorothy L. Sayers. Although this does not feature Lord Peter Wimsey, there is plenty to engage lovers of Golden Age crime fiction.

A young artist and an aspiring artist move upstairs from a married couple, called the Harrisons, who live with a middle aged companion, named Agnes Milsom. When an unusual death occurs, the son of the victim attempts to get to the bottom of the matter by examining all of the letters written between the various correspondents, along with reports and statements.

This is an unusual crime novel and it is great to re-visit Doroth L. Sayers work again. Feel free to post spoilers in this thread.

[Judy]

I thought the solution to this mystery was very clever- a bit like one of Christie’s fiendishly complicated poison solutions.

However I do agree with Jill’s comment in the other thread that the love letters go on for too long and the same with the scientific explanation at the end. I assume this is the bit that co-writer Robert Eustace helped with.

[Susan]

It must be a difficult thing to write a novel using just letters. I am thinking of older, Victoria books, such as Clarissa, or, the History of a Young Lady, which went on far longer. I have never waded through all of Clarissa, but I seem to recall people writing three or four letters a day between different characters! I suppose it is no more than writing emails back and forth, but I suspect the mail service worked far faster then...

[Judy]

I loved Clarissa, Susan - also Pamela and The History Of Sir Charles Grandison Bart by Samuel Richardson. All massively long 18th-century novels told in letters, but beautifully readable.

Getting back to The Documents in the Case, the letters didn't spend much time asking the correspondents at the other end what they were doing - although there was the whole business about Ronnie, which I'm not sure I quite understood.

[Susan]

I suspect the whole Ronnie story was just to highlight the fact that Aggie interfered where she wasn't wanted. I thought it was funny the way she went on about her 'crafts' and how popular they were (even a possible side business for Agnes Milsom), while Mr Harrison just bemoaned all the bits and pieces and rubbish left all over the place! It was just the way people see things differently - she was absurd to everyone but herself, poor woman.

[Sandy]

I thought this was a very interesting way of presenting the mystery. I really enjoyed the way my view of the situation changed with each new narrator. I'm glad Sayers addressed how Paul had gotten these letters as I was wondering about that, and why we only got one side of the correspondence.

I was surprised at the solution as I thought, obviously wrongly, that "handedness" in organic compounds was discovered much more recently.

I agree that the scientific explanation went on too long, as did the religious discussion. I assume that was Sayers' other persona taking over. I had started just skimming in annoyance until the handedness factor was mentioned.

I didn't mind Jack's love letters rambling on (though Paul Harrison thought he was showing off), but Margaret's, aka Lolo, were just icky. Any good opinion I had of Lothom was dispelled; he should have dropped her after the first letters.

[Susan]

Ha ha! Yes, you are right, Sandy - Margaret's letters were really horrible. He may have been a good artist, but he had bad taste.

[Judy]

Yes, I enjoyed Jack's letters, even though I agreed with Paul Harrison about him showing off - but 'Lolo' was dreadful.

[Susan]

Margaret was also very calculating. Suggesting she was pregnant, for example, to try to force his hand.

[Judy]

Talking of Margaret aka Lolo, did anyone think she was an accomplice to the crime, or not? I thought probably not, as she wrote in one of the letters about how providence had removed her husband without them having to do anything.

I think there was a suggestion that she just wrote that in order to clear herself in the future, but this didn't seem likely to me.

[Susan]

I felt she was involved - if not an accomplice, she certainly encouraged/suggested/instigated it, in my opinion.

[Judy]

She says things that give him the idea, but is it intentional? I wasn’t sure. I suppose if she is just pretending to think she is pregnant that could be to egg him on, as you suggested, Susan, but I think it is all left ambiguous.

[Roman Clodia]

I definitely see Lolo (loved the pretentiousness of Lolo and Petra!) as being implicated and see her as cleverer than she makes out in her breathless letters. The pregnancy? Ambiguous, as you say, whether it's genuine or a ploy.

[Susan]

It is ambiguous, but I thought, personally, that she was very manipulative.

[Sandy]

I agree she was manipulative and, without ever saying it directly, encouraged Lothom to murder her husband. I believe, without proof, the pregnancy was a ruse to get him to move faster. If not a ruse, it was very convenient, both when it was discovered and when it proved a false alarm. Though, on the other hand, her pleading letters could have gone on ... and on ... and on. Sayers needed an ending even more than Margaret.

RC, I agree Margaret was quite clever. And probably as evil as Paul suspected.

[Susan]

I couldn't quite see why he would have actually murdered Mr Harrison otherwise. He seemed to actually like him and the affair might have just petered out in time. However, Margaret's saying she was pregnant pushed him to move and take a tragic decision. I agreed with Paul that Margaret was partly to blame and that she put the idea into his head and pushed him into acting on it.

[Judy]

I think she comes across very badly in her letters but I don't think it's clear whether she is technically guilty of a crime - we are left to wonder.

[Susan]

Yes, true. Half of the fun is judging the characters yourself. It's a little like jury service - judging on the responses, we'd probably find her guilty though, overall.

[Judy]

Interesting how we also see the relationship between the Harrisons from both angles, with Jack sympathising with the husband and Aggie with the wife. I suspect the truth lies somewhere in the middle...

[Susan]

Yes, exactly. You are right, Judy, the letters are somewhat ambiguous and you have to read between the lines.

[Judy]

Talking about the wife's letters has reminded me, I'd read that the Documents in the Case was inspired by the famous Edith Thompson/Frederick Bywaters case.

A young man killed his lover's older husband and her letters were crucial evidence, suggesting she had urged him on, although he said she had nothing to do with it and there are still arguments about whether she was guilty at all.

There was a good TV film of this many years ago, Cause Celebre, starring Helen Mirren as Edith and David Morrissey as Frederick.

[Judy]

While looking up details about Edith Thompson, who was famously hanged, I found an article by Martin Edwards about Sayers' fascination with true crime.

Best only to read this if you have read Strong Poison, as he discusses links between the plot of that book and another famous real life case.

http://www.martinedwardsbooks.com/say...

[Susan]

Rex v Edith Thompson is out next month, Judy.

[Suki]

I joined this group right at the tail end of your reading the Lord Wimsey books, and I was really diappointed that I'd missed it. I read a few Sayers years ago, and had always wanted to read that series. I was very happy when I saw that this book was one of February's reads. I enjoyed it a great deal; the style of the book was a lot of fun to read, and it was a change of pace to follow a mystery that didn't have an official detective "in charge" of the story. The cast of characters was amazing-- it was interesting how differently they were portrayed through their own eyes and through the eyes of others. I felt sorry for Agatha Milsom-- she just didn't fit in anywhere, even though she tried. In the end, I came to like George Harrison-- I wasn't sure about him in the beginning because the portrayals were very unkind, but after reading his wife's creepy letters to "Petra", I felt a lot more sympathetic towards him. Lathom and Munting seemed kind of two-dimensional at first; it was interesting to see their characters take shape as the story went on. I found the science fascinating-- some of it was quite modern, then they started talking about 'aether'. The fact that they were actually able to prove that the poison was synthesized and not naturally occuring was a good twist!

[Susan]

I agree that George Harrison was quite sympathetic. I think it was interesting the way the letters unfolded their individual personalities.

[Judy]

Some great comments, Suki. I agree that

it was interesting how differently they were portrayed through their own eyes and through the eyes of others.

I also felt a bit sorry for Agatha, even though I found her amusing at times.

I'm not so sure about George Harrison though - he came across quite sympathetically from his own letters, but it sounded from others' letters as if he was overbearing to his wife in everyday life even though he wrote about her nicely to others. To me this suggested he was a bit hypocritical.

[Sandy]

I also have mixed feelings about George. He seems to have valued his wife in only an abstract way: liking her better when he didn't have to interact with her. I have a low opinion of the wife, so feel his attitude might be understandable though not commendable.

Certainly he was loved by his son.

[Jill]

I wondered if he would have treated his wife better if Agatha Milsom had not been there all the time telling his wife all the ways he was treating her wrong. She was obviously quite an opinionated woman, even causing trouble between her sister and nephew.