Whose Body? (Lord Peter Wimsey, #1) (2024)

What tremendous fun! No wonder Sayers is considered one of the "Queens of Crime" alongside Agatha Christie.

Assigning a motive for the murder of a person without relations or antecedents or even clothes is like trying to visualise the fourth dimension — admirable exercise for the imagination, but arduous and inconclusive.

No, what makes this book shine are the characters and fabulous dialogue. Whose Body? is a hundred years old now and the humour still hits perfectly. Lord Peter Wimsey and his interactions with the other characters are so entertaining. From his chiding of Parker's tendency to explain away logical conclusions to the whole Jeeves and Wooster vibe I got from him and Bunter. And he is quite a comical character in himself.

“Oh, yes,” said Lord Peter, “but most of us have such dozens of motives for murderin’ all sorts of inoffensive people. There’s lots of people I’d like to murder, wouldn’t you?”
“Heaps,” said Lady Swaffham. “There’s that dreadful — perhaps I’d better not say it, though, for fear you should remember it later on.”
“Well, I wouldn’t if I were you,” said Peter, amiably. “You never know. It’d be beastly awkward if the person died suddenly to-morrow.”

While I was searching for more books narrated by Mark Meadows I found this one which was already on my shortlist so I decided to start it right away. Whose Body? Is the 1st volume in the famous Lord Peter Wimsey series written by Dorothy L. Sayers.

The Lord has a strange hobby. He likes to investigate murders which is may times inconvenient for the police force. This time he finds out about an unknown naked body who appeared dead in the bathroom of one of his acquaintances. At the same time, his inspector friend investigates the disappearance of a lawyer. Are those two events connected? Well, you need to read the novel to find out.

The novel was written in 1923 so I thought the writing style and the humour a bit outdated but I still enjoyed it well enough. I plan to continue with the series in the near future when I feel like reading a cozy mystery to get me through the day.

The very first Lord Peter Wimsey novel, and thus the genesis of one of the most engaging characters I've ever encountered, literary or otherwise. Actually, make that at least two (since Bunter is equally astounding), and maybe three (because the Dowager's quite engaging, too). In rereading this, I found myself surprised at how solid the characters are at the very beginning of the series; they are essentially the same fully-realized people they are ten books later, though we only see certain facets of them here. More dimension follows later.

There is so much that I love about this book, including the very first page; its first two words, and indeed the first two words Wimsey ever utters to us, are "Oh, damn!" Just a few lines down is the sentence that encapsulates so much about Sayers's writing, the perfect litmus test for the Lord Peter series: "His long, amiable face looked as if it had generated spontaneously from his top hat, as white maggots breed from Gorgonzola." Either you find that quirkily poetic and want to read more, or you should be reading something else entirely.

(Curiously, this is only the first of no fewer than three completely random and incidental mentions in this volume of that particular cheese. I have to assume that Sayers was a fan.)

The actual mystery is brilliant: a man goes into his bathroom one morning to find a naked corpse in the tub, wearing nothing but a pair of golden pince-nez. He has no idea who the man might be or how he came to be dead in his tub. Meanwhile, a financial bigwig's gone missing, and while he bears a superficial likeness to the corpse found across town, they are clearly not one and the same.

But as satisfying as the cases are, more satisfying by far is the chance to meet Lord Peter as he babbles foolishly in the way only the very rich can get away with, picking apart the mysteries while quoting poetry in between snifters of Napoleon brandy and bidding on early editions of Dante. And early-'20s England is painted beautifully—which is not entirely surprising, given that the book was written in, erm, early-'20s England. Quite.

There are some rough edges, to be sure (the odd temporary shifts into second person perspective leap to mind), but they are ultimately very forgivable in a first novel and almost seem charming in light of the later works.

If you'd like to give it a whirl before expending any energy to get an actual copy of the book, the novel is now public domain, and appears in its entirety here: [http://digital.library.upenn.edu/wome...]. And the preface is quite good, too.

Oh, I feel so badly how much I disliked this book. As a mystery genre fan and avid reader of Agatha Christie, I thought for sure I would enjoy the much-reccomended Lord Peter Wimsey series by Dorothy L. Sayers. But alas, I found myself bored and annoyed by the personalities of the characters.

The plot seems interesting enough: a random body of a man wearing nothing but a pair of glasses shows up in a bathtub. Who is he and how did it get there? Book collector Peter Wimsey is on the case! To be honest I couldn't bring myself to complete this book. The characters were much too arrogant for my taste and the whole take on the mystery solving seemed primitive. Not to mention constant anti-semetic comments littering much of the book. I just was very turned off by it all.

Some people consider this an early mystery masterpiece. Me? I pass.

Time to meet Lord Peter Wimsey, archetype of amateur gentleman detective & his sidekick, the invaluable valet Bunter.

“Bunter!”
“Yes, my lord.”
“Her Grace tells me that a respectable Battersea architect has discovered a dead man in his bath.” “Indeed, my lord? That’s very gratifying.”
“Very, Bunter. Your choice of words is unerring. I wish Eton and Balliol had done as much for me."

Update 13/03/2017
I did not really have any expectations, this book having been my first from Dorothy L. Sayers, just some curiosity of how she compares to my beloved Agatha Christie. Having said that much, I was still pleasantly surprised at how much enjoyed reading it.

I loved the all characters: Lord Peter Wimsey, Bunter, detective inspector Parker & the Dowager duch*ess of Denver (Lord Peter's mother).

In the beginning, Bunter read very much like Jeeves to Lord Peter's Bertie Wooster:

Lord Peter Wimsey: "It’s much easier to work on someone else’s job than one’s own—gives one that delightful feelin’ of interferin’ and bossin’ about, combined with the glorious sensation that another fellow is takin’ all one’s own work off one’s hands."

Bunter: "Yes, Mr. Graves, it’s a hard life, valeting by day and developing by night—morning tea at any time from 6.30 to 11, and criminal investigation at all hours."

"I’m off. With a taxi I can just—” “Not in those trousers, my lord,” said Mr. Bunter, blocking the way to the door with deferential firmness. “Oh, Bunter,” pleaded his lordship, “do let me—just this once. You don’t know how important it is.” “Not on any account, my lord. It would be as much as my place is worth.”

Their exchanges are funny and a nice comic relief, but as the story continues both characters -along with DI Parker - gather depth. Nothing too elaborately detailed, but rather through some nice little touches you learn that a seemingly flippant, offhand Lord Peter served in WW I and suffered a nervous breakdown due to shell shock from which he never recovered completely. Sometimes he has relapses, especially if his investigations -like here- lead to someone (even though a murderer) losing their life.
We also learn that Bunter served under Lord Peter's command & during his relapses he takes care of him conscientiously & effectively.

Detective Parker seems to be another sidekick to Lord Peter.

“It affords me, if I may say so, the greatest satisfaction,” continued the noble lord, “that in a collaboration like ours all the uninteresting and disagreeable routine work is done by you.”

He is thorough, cautious, clever & well-educated (reminds me a bit of Lt. Arthur Tragg in the Perry Mason series). He likes reading biblical commentary as a chill-out before going to sleep.

One of the most interesting parts of the book was a conversation between Lord Peter & Parker which highlights their characters even more:
“Look here, Peter,” said the other with some earnestness, “suppose you get this playing-fields-of-Eton complex out of your system once and for all. There doesn’t seem to be much doubt that something unpleasant has happened to Sir Reuben Levy. Call it murder, to strengthen the argument. If Sir Reuben has been murdered, is it a game? and is it fair to treat it as a game?” “That’s what I’m ashamed of, really,” said Lord Peter. “It is a game to me, to begin with, and I go on cheerfully, and then I suddenly see that somebody is going to be hurt, and I want to get out of it.” “Yes, yes, I know,” said the detective, “but that’s because you’re thinking about your attitude. You want to be consistent, you want to look pretty, you want to swagger debonairly through a comedy of puppets or else to stalk magnificently through a tragedy of human sorrows and things. But that’s childish. If you’ve any duty to society in the way of finding out the truth about murders, you must do it in any attitude that comes handy. You want to be elegant and detached? That’s all right, if you find the truth out that way, but it hasn’t any value in itself, you know. You want to look dignified and consistent—what’s that got to do with it? You want to hunt down a murderer for the sport of the thing and then shake hands with him and say, ‘Well played—hard luck—you shall have your revenge tomorrow!’ Well, you can’t do it like that. Life’s not a football match. You want to be a sportsman. You can’t be a sportsman. You’re a responsible person.” “I don’t think you ought to read so much theology,” said Lord Peter. “It has a brutalizing influence.”

When finding out who the murderer is, Lord Peter gets also thrown into a moral dilemma The murderer, though not a nice person, as such, is a very useful member of society, who does some good work & is charitable that brings on one of his relapses.

You can guess who the perpetrator is relatively quickly. Sayers places her clues inconspicuously, but they can be discovered without much difficulty and yet it does not really diminish the merits of the book. It stays enjoyable from beginning to end.

This kind of reminds me of a cross between Agatha Christie's Poirot and PG Wodehouse's Jeeves series.
Not as interesting mystery-wise as Poirot and not as funny as Jeeves.

The gist is that Lord Peter Wimsey is a gentleman detective (much to the annoyance of his older brother) who has a faithful valet and a friend in the police department.
This time around his mother directs him toward a case involving the missing husband of one of her childhood friends.
There's a whole case of mistaken identity when a naked dead man turns up in a random bathtub and the police think it is the body of the missing man. Lord Peter, however, realizes not all is as it seems.
There is much more to the story, of course.

I kept zoning out during the narration and had to keep backing it up. I'm not really sure why. Perhaps I just wasn't in the right mood for a classic detective story?
I don't know.
I wasn't all that impressed but since it's just the first book in the series, I'll keep going.

Wanda McCaddon narrator

Dorothy L. Sayers wrote mysteries (notably, the Lord Peter Wimsey series) from the 1920’s through the early 1950’s. She also did translations, such as Dante’s Inferno. She was a controversial writer of her time and a very accomplished one. From letters she wrote, she had begun working out her plot for Whose Body? in 1920-21 and the book was published in 1923.

Lord Peter Wimsey has found his own critics as a character. He was in WWI and experienced “shell shock” with a consequent fear of responsibility due to his regiment being decimated during the war. He comes off as garrulous at times due to nervous tension, and all the quirks of his personality are due to his war experiences. At the same time, he is aware of his life of privilege and wants to do something meaningful; thus, his ‘hobby’ of investigating crime cases.

The Dowager duch*ess of Denver, Lord Peter’s and Lord Wimsey’s (Gerald) mother, is shrewd enough to know that if her son is to fully recover, his hobby could be a good avenue for getting there. When she learns that the body of a man turns up in the tub of an architect she knows, she lets Peter know about it and asks him to see if there is anything he can do.

Detective Sugg, an “arrest-whoever-is-handy” sort, is in the process of trying to find proof that the architect and his house maid contrived to hide this crime in plain view. Lord Peter disagrees, and his friend with Scotland Yard, Charles Parker, sees it the same as Lord Peter. Meantime, Parker also has a case that just came up: a well-known Jewish financier named Sir Reuben Levy has disappeared.

Thus begins the story that winds its way through many different households and settings. The writing is definitely brilliant and, aside from Lord Peter’s own thought processes becoming the chief red herrings, those same wayward thought processes get the job of solving the crime done.

Bunter, Lord Peter’s manservant and one of his Seargents in the war, is a photography buff and aids in both finding and eliminating possible leads. Parker takes up a lot of Lord Peter’s slack when Lord Peter experiences agitation at getting too close to possible suspects. At one point, Parker lectures him that he can’t treat crime solving like a football match at school; that it isn’t a game and he must get over his notion of giving suspects a “sporting chance”.

Lord Peter, at one point, does have an episode with flashbacks to the war. It is when he believes he has discovered a guilty person and is reluctant, yet driven, to do the right thing.

The depth of the characters is one of the chief features of this book. While they may awkwardly hide behind academics or sheer verbal frivolity at times, there are reasons (if no excuses) for these excursions. I enjoyed the psychological aspects of the characters as much as I did the mystery itself. This initial offering in the series has made me very curious and I look forward to getting to know these characters further in the second book of the series.

British Jason #1: Jolly good book, what?
British Jason #2: Oh, rather!
British Jason #1: I say, how much longer do you suppose we can keep this up?
British Jason #2: Not long, old bean. I've run out of stereotypical Brit words and this ridiculous accent is doing me head in!

I almost filed this all up in my PG Wodehouse shelf. The similarities in style, setting and character are striking. There's a somewhat daffy lead in Lord Peter Wimsey, though he's clearly got more on the ball than Bertie Wooster. There's the taciturn Parker, just a little looser and given more freedom than the butler Jeeves. After all, Parker is a police investigator and his own man. Even the time and place, 1920s England, hits the Jeeves/Wooster mark.

The mystery of who dunnit wasn't exactly mind-boggling. I suspected the culprit almost the moment he hit the stage. But this mystery doesn't seem to care for the diabolical plot as much as others in the genre. Dorothy Sayers appears to be more interested in developing a deeper character. No, no one between the pages of Whose Body? is coming close to Dostoyevsky's Raskolnikov, but Sayers seems more concerned with her whys as opposed to her whos.

For instance, the reasoning behind Lord Peter's desire to catch criminals comes into question more than once through the book. His past reaches into the present to color the proceedings. These are nice touches that you don't tend to get with Agatha Christie.

Who’s That Naked Man In My Bathtub?

Lord Peter Wimsey is called upon for help, by his friend, Inspector Parker. An unknown, naked man is found in someone’s house, upstairs in the bathtub!

The local police are only interested in arresting the owner of the house and hopefully close the case.

Fortunately, for the home owner, Lord Peter believes there is more to the crime than the eyes can see.

He quickly places his “thinking cap” on his head, and allows his brain to simmer and boil until he is able to feed Parker his outcome of his opinion.

This is the first book by Dorothy L. Sayers I have read and it helped make me a lover of British golden mysteries. I hope it works the same magic for you.

Four stars! 💫💫💫💫

Lord Peter Wimsey is most definitely a sleuth to avoid if you are up to no good. He aspires to be a more modern "Watson" and, by Jove, he is quite the observant gentleman. His actions when inspecting the dead body in the bathtub seemed a bit comical and added a bit of levity to the narrative.
His valet, Bunter, is a delightful character and clearly the two share a very strong bond. Despite his civilian designation, Wimsey is for the most part respected and has access to crime scenes and other materials to aid in his investigation. He also worked very well with Detective Parker -- not so well with Sugg, but that is clearly an error on the latter's part. What did not work for me was the very small and crowded font of the printed copy I checked out from my library. I am ever so glad to have finally read one of Dorothy L. Sayers' classic mysteries.

What a complete and utter mess of a book! I had been informed by many reliable sources (including Lucy Worsley in her documentary A Very British Murder) that Sayers was even better than Christie where murder mysteries are concerned. They are all wrong!

This mystery has an intriguing enough premise - a naked dead body is found in the home of a harmless man that everyone automatically knew was not the murderer because well, the Wimseys (mother and son) said so! Lord Wimsey is called on to investigate the murder. At the same time, Wimsey's friend, Parker, is searching for a missing person - a JEW. Mind you, JEW in capital letters. A self made JEW. A good man despite being a JEW. JEW JEW JEW. Got that? All right. For some reason unknown to the reader, Wimsey is insistent that both cases are related. And then I really don't know what happens. Or why. Because it's that badly written. I don't understand how Wimsey even arrives at the conclusion that X is the murderer. The motive for the murder is largely unbelievable and doesn't even make much sense.

The characters are hideous! Peter Wimsey is extremely annoying in every way possible. He puts on an affectation every time he opens his mouth. He tries some weird accent that doesn't add anything to his character or to the plot. He is shallow and annoying and I constantly felt the need to slap him. Hard. Especially when he begins to quote random poetry or starts singing at people who have no clue what he's doing. I have a strong suspicion that Sayers meant it all to funny, but it falls terribly flat. The duch*ess is even more annoying, if possible. The entire aura of upper class British aristocracy is shamelessly flaunted as something awesome, without any context to its existence. (And I say this as a Downton Abbey lover!)

I honestly feel bad I started my year with this dud. I don't think I'll be wasting my time on any more Sayers. This certainly is not a classic, whatever else it may be.

3,5 ⭐

você precisa saber MUITO pra escrever isso aqui 100 anos atrás. que privilégio ter conhecido a escrita e audácia de dorothy.

It's difficult for me to be objective about Dorothy L Sayers. Since discovering Strong Poison in the school library when I was about 14, she has been one of my favourite writers and one whose novels I re-read regularly. In the past couple of years I've ventured beyond the novels and the short stories (not being much of a short story reader, I've not read all of these) to read Sayers' collected letters, some of her essays (such as Are Women Human?) and Barbara Reynold's excellent biography, Dorothy L. Sayers: Her Life and Soul. This has in turn made me want to read more of Sayers' non-fiction as well as her plays and her translation of Dante. Suffice to say, I'm a big fan and a shared love of Sayers' writing is what has introduced me to a number of my GR friends.

This novel is where it started for Sayers' best known contribution to

For a first novel, this has a lot of strengths. Lord Peter, the wealthy and erudite younger son of a Duke, shell-shocked WWI veteran, musician, collector of incunabula and amateur detective, comes to the page fully created. He develops throughout the course of the twelve novels in which he features, but the essentials of his character are there from the beginning: the sharp intelligence, the ready wit, the tendency to quote poetry at odd moments, the silly-ass impersonation and affected drawl of his public persona, which disappears when he speaks seriously to those he is closest to, the troubled conscience, the lingering effects of shell-shock. Lord Peter is a superb character, as are his manservant Bunter, his friend Scotland Yard inspector Charles Parker and his truly wonderful mother, the Dowager duch*ess, all of whom (thankfully) also feature in later novels.

The deft characterisation - not at all common in a Golden Age mystery novel - is not the only strength of Sayers' writing. Her prose is excellent, her dialogue is witty and the mystery itself is interesting enough. That said, the novel is not without its weaknesses. There is, for example, a startling lapse from the third person voice to the second person at one point in the narrative. In addition, the perpetrator is not that difficult to pick (although admittedly the big reveal is not necessarily a feature of Sayers' novels), the perpetrator's method is complex and improbable and the novel contains one of my pet peeves in crime fiction - the extended confession in the form of a letter.

The weaknesses are enough for me to rate the novel lower than I would want to rate anything written by Sayers. However, the fangirl in me means I can't bring myself to give this less than 4 stars, well, maybe 3-3/4. I'm looking forward to a Lord Peter re-read over the next 12 months with my good friend and Sayers novice Jemidar.

There are many book series that over the years I have said "I'd love to read those books!'' and then never did. Lord Peter Wimsey is one of those great characters that I vowed to visit, and promptly forgot my promise. In an attempt to turn over a new leaf reading-wise, I am changing this habit. When I find a book that really appeals to me, I make the time and read the book! This does mean that I reshuffle my TBR pile more, but that's ok. I have already read several delightful books that I probably never would have read otherwise. They would all still be lost in wishicouldreadthisland. Recently I read an article listing several female detective writers that wrote before and at the same time as Agatha Christie, and I had never read a single word of any of their writings. Then I watched a documentary by Lucy Worsley about British murders that mentioned most of the same authors again. When the little voice inside my head started saying "I would love to read that!'' I didn't allow myself to just forget about it . I immediately picked one of the authors -- Dorothy L. Sayers. I went to openlibrary.org and found a scanned copy of Whose Body? and actually started reading! Finally reading Sayers is just the first step. I have a whole list of female mystery writers from that time period....and one at a time, I'm going to actually delve into their fictional worlds and savor their exceptional talent as storytellers.

Whose Body? is the first Lord Peter Wimsey story. He is quite an interesting character. English aristocracy. Wealthy, privileged, a bit of an upper class dandy....but with a difference....he can solve crimes. He's different from Sherlock and Poirot in that he goes after a case with a sense of flair, humor, and upper class sarcasm. He uses his social standing to gain a foothold and his brains to finish the job. I thought I might find him annoying....rather upper class twit-ish. But from the first chapter of Whose Body? I found myself liking Wimsey....he's amusing, capable and at times, pokes fun at himself and his class with witty bad verse and even song. Too much fun!

In his first case, Wimsey teams up with his friend Charles Parker, to solve the discovery of a murdered naked dead man in a bathtub, and the disappearance of a local financier, Sir Reuben Levy. Levy left his house in the middle of the night without so much as a stitch of clothing with him, never to return. The police (namely Wimsey's nemesis, Detective Sugg) want to claim the dead body in the tub as the financier....find a naked man, lose a naked man, they must be one and the same, right? But Wimsey knows the dead man is not the missing wealthy Jewish financier......so who is he? Sugg is quick to rush to judgement in an effort to close the case -- he arrests the man who lives in the apartment where the dead body was discovered, and a servant girl. Wimsey knows Mr. Thipps did not kill the strange man, but he knows he needs to discover the identity of the found corpse and his killer and find the missing banker before Sugg makes more mistakes. With his trusty man servant Bunter and Scotland Yard's Charles Parker in tow, Lord Peter Wimsey is on the case!

At just over 200 pages, this book is a quick and fun read. Wimsey and Parker each take a case and begin investigating, then compare information with each other. And Wimsey's trusted manservant Bunter photographs items and dusts for fingerprints, all while quizzing the servants about their employers and anything they may have witnessed or overheard. All of this is done with Sugg of Scotland Yard seething in the background. Wimsey pulled rank (his mother is good friends with the Chief, of course) and has complete access to the crime scenes. Cue more Sugg seething. You know, the poor guy isn't that great of a detective, but he is an excellent seether. Too bad there isn't a spot at Scotland Yard for seething. He would be perfect. In the end, this case turns out to have just as many magnificent twists and turns as any Christie novel. And it is just as masterfully executed. I am definitely going to push on to book 2.....Wimsey's brain power and antics are just too fun!

Dorothy L. Sayers wrote 11 Lord Peter Wimsey books and five collections of short stories. Author Jill Paton Walsh completed an unfinished manuscript left by Sayers and also wrote 3 Wimsey books herself. I was led to finally read this series while watching the documentary A Very British Murder featuring Historian Lucy Worsley. She mentions many classic mystery writers. My TBR grew by leaps and bounds!! The documentary is wonderful for classic mystery lovers (I found it streaming on Britbox). I highly recommend anything by Lucy Worsley! She discusses history with intelligence, understanding, and humor!

At last, I pick up Dorothy Sayers' first mystery novel and finally learn the Origins of Lord Peter!

...except, this isn't an origin story like I was expecting. We don't get to see Lord Peter as Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins, deciding to become a defender of justice while pretending to be a empty-headed rich playboy (oh man, did anyone else start thinking of Peter Wimsey/Batman slashfic? Maybe Batman builds a time machine and goes back to the 1930's and he and Peter fight crime together while Alfred and Bunter hang out and trade dry witticisms

Aside from that quibble, I enjoyed this story pretty well - like most other reviewers, I guessed the culprit pretty quickly, but it's not Sayers' fault that I watch so much Law and Order: SVU and have learned to pick out the patterns. This is very obviously a first novel, and her style has improved a lot since this book. It's not the best in the series, but it's still a fun, brief detective romp. Which leaves only one thing left to talk about.

RACISM.

In her very thoughtful review of this book, Kelly expressed discomfort with what she saw as anti-Semitic elements present throughout the plot. Having now finished the book, I disagree with this reading, and will try to explain myself without pissing anyone off.

First: an author is not her characters, and just because a character expresses a certain view does not mean that the author shares this view. It's true that some of the minor characters in this book express anti-Semitic opinion, but I think Sayers is using their prejudiced beliefs to make a point about how Jews were seen by the general population at the time - I don't think anyone can deny that in the 1920's, people were still racist as hell.

Secondly, I read the book specifically looking for anti-Semitic statements and...I just don't see them. Some (not all) characters are prejudiced against Jews, but no one is saying that Jews are evil - if anything, characters just echo commonly accepted misconceptions and stereotypes about Jews, and none of it seems motivated by a particular malice, but by just general ignorance. A prime example of this is Peter's mother who delivers what Kelly saw as a lengthy rant against Jews (I think she was referencing Peter's mother, anyway - the character's not named in the review, so I apologize if I got it wrong, Kelly) Here's some of the duch*ess's dialogue, judge for yourself: "...and I'm sure some Jews are very good people, and personally I'd much rather they believed something, though of course it must be very inconvenient, what with not working on Saturdays and circumcising the poor little babies and everything depending on the new moon and that funny kind of meat they have with such a slang-sounding name, and never being able to have bacon for breakfast. Still, there it was, and it was much better for the girl to marry him if she was really fond of him..."

I don't see anti-Semitism in that. Peter's mother doesn't understand Judaism very well, but there's nothing particularly unkind in her dialogue - in fact, she's basically saying, "Yes, Jews are different and I don't understand their religion at all, but they should be able to marry who they like." Furthermore, I think that based on what I know of Sayers' other books, the speech is meant to be a comic display of how little Judaism was understood at the time. I don't think Peter's mother is anti-Semitic, and I don't think the book is, either.

So I am part of the English Mysteries Group, Buddy Read of all the Dorothy L Sayers Lord Peter Wimsey novels and short stories. We are reading the books in order over the next year or so.

Now , it has to be (with the exception of a couple of books), over 40 years since I read any of these books. My Mother had a full set of the early paperbacks, that I can picture on her bookshelves, and I occasionally delved into her books for a change as a youngster.

I have to say that I struggled for the first 30 or so pages. I think it was simply because I was finding it difficult to get any quality time reading, so any reading I did, was only a few pages each time. Once I got a run at it I really enjoyed it.
The characters as one of my co readers noted, are very quickly developed, and very believable. The interplay between Lord Peter and his friend Chief Inspector Paerker, and also between Lord Peter and his manservant Bunter are intrinsic to the story and are just an enjoyable experience.
In this story Lord P is called into a puzzle to help a friend of his mother who finds an unknown body in his bath, meanwhile Ch. Insp Parker is investigating the disappearance of an important financier. Are the mysteries in any way connected, and if so how ?
Ably assisted by Parker and Bunter Lord Peter wades in to solve the mysteries.

Anyway onto book 2 with a sense of anticipation.

A really delightful, engaging, fun read. Can't wait to read more by Dorothy L. Sayers!

Eine Detektivgeschichte aus dem Jahr 1923. Ein Lord, der gerne Kriminalfälle löst. Sein Butler, der wie ein braver Lakai durch die Gegend geschickt wird. Ein Kommissar von Scotland Yard, der natürlich viel zu dappig ist, um den Fall zu lösen. Handlungsort: London. Es las sich, wie ein guter, alter Edgar Wallace. Es hat Spaß gemacht, so etwas mal wieder zu lesen.

One of the greats among mystery writers,September 16, 2017

Verified Purchase

This review is from:Whose Body? (The Lord Peter Wimsey Mysteries Book 1) (Kindle Edition)

Dorothy Sayers was one of the great British mystery authors, writing with verve and humour. She was associated with C.S. Lewis and the Inklings. She also attended meetings of the Socratic Club. C. S. Lewis said that he read Sayers' The Man Born to be King, a play about Jesus, every Easter. Sayers knew J. R. R. Tolkien who read some of the Wimsey novels but disliked the later ones, such as Gaudy Night.

Whose Body was written in the early 1920's. It reflects attitudes toward Jews which were common in Britain at the time. Today, the book would be considered insensitive by the politically correct while anti-Semitics would condemn it for being favorable to Jews. The rest of us can simply accept it as a slice of life in the 1920's.

In my opinion, this first Peter Wimsey novel is a very good mystery but not as strong as subsequent works such as The Nine Tailors. Sayers herself considered her translation of Dante's Divine Comedy to be her greatest work.

Lord Peter Wimsey is a charming, intelligent aristocrat who keeps occupied as a rare book collector and an amateur sleuth. Set in post-World War I Britain, he occasionally suffers from PTSD from his war years. Wimsey enlists the help of his valet, Mervyn Bunter, in the detective work, and the dry British wit of the duo had me laughing. Wimsey's mother, the Dowager duch*ess of Denver, is another wonderful character--a socialite who often voices the feelings of the 1920s upper class.

A body--naked except for a pair of gold pince-nez-- is found in the bathtub of an acquaintance of Wimsey's mother. On the same day Reuben Levy, an important Jewish financier, is reported missing. The corpse has a mild resemblance to Levy. Wimsey, Bunter, and the competent Inspector Parker from Scotland Yard work together to solve the cases. A confessional letter by the criminal at the end of the book detailed why the corpse was found in the tub.

Although the characters seem to think that the Jewish Reuben Levy is a good person, there were quite a few stereotypical comments about Jews scattered throughout the book. It is probably reflective of the lack of understanding of other religions and ethnic groups that existed in 1923.

This short detective story is the first of a series of Lord Peter Wimsey cozy mysteries. It kept my interest, and I especially enjoyed the humor.

This was my first Dorothy Sayers cozy mystery and I enjoyed it. It took me a bit to get used to the writing style; at times I felt like I was missing something in the dialogue or I couldn't quite follow the train of thought of the astute and often amusing Lord Peter Wimsey. I suspect that the story wasn't quite polished, but eventually I settled in and had fun with it.

The character of Lord Peter Wimsey appealed to me, as did his industrious butler, Bunter. I would like to see these characters developed more fully in later installments in the series. The relationship between Lord Peter and the detective, Parker, was equally entertaining. "It affords me, if I may so, the greatest satisfaction, that in a collaboration like ours all the uninteresting and disagreeable routine work is done by you", this uttered by Lord Peter to Parker in reference to their partnership. Another favorite bit of sarcasm by Lord Peter here: "Sugg's a beautiful, braying ass. He's like a detective in a novel." So, I give this mystery three stars for providing a fun bit of diversion; I look forward to reading another.

2.5 stars
I vaguely remember reading a few of these in my teenage years and as I felt it was time to look again I thought I would try the first in the series. This was Sayers’s first novel and Wimsey’s character is somewhat underdeveloped compared to the later novels. Sayers did talk about her reasons for creating Wimsey as a rich aristocrat:
“Lord Peter’s large income (the source of which, by the way, I have never investigated) was a different matter. I deliberately gave him that. After all, it cost me nothing, and at that time I was particularly hard up and it gave me pleasure to spend his fortune for him. When I was dissatisfied with my single unfurnished room, I took a luxurious flat for him in Piccadilly. When my cheap rug got a hole in it, I ordered an Aubusson carpet. When I had no money to pay my bus fare, I presented him with a Daimler double six, upholstered in a style of sober magnificence, and when I felt dull I let him drive it.”
Well, it’s never worked for me! In this first novel I felt there was a distinct link with Wodehouse. Wimsey feels like an intelligent version of Wooster. He also has a very bright manservant (Bunter), not unlike Jeeves. Some of the descriptions are even more reminiscent of Wodehouse as in this one of Wimsey:
“His long, amiable face looked as if it had generated spontaneously from his top hat, as white maggots breed from Gorgonzola.”
The plot is rather ingenious and convoluted, but is solved relatively quickly by Wimsey. There is the typical obstructive policeman and another police detective who admires Wimsey and assists him in a Holmes/Watson type manner.
It has been said previously that this first in the series is fairly slight and it certainly is. The entrance of Harriet Vane later in the series apparently makes a difference. This could easily have been a total write off, but there was an interesting addition to the mostly mundane. Wimsey is described as having suffered from shellshock at the end of the War (we are in about 1923). His manservant Bunter was Wimsey’s batman during the War (inevitably Wimsey was an officer). There is a quite effective description of PTSD in the book affecting Wimsey and managed by Bunter which managed to salvage it from being a complete washout. There is also the beginnings of nuance in Wimsey’s character:
“but if it comes to really running down a live person and getting him hanged, or even quodded, poor devil, there don’t seem as if there was any excuse for me buttin’ in, since I don’t have to make my livin’ by it. And I feel as if I oughtn’t ever to find it amusin’. But I do.”
Parker, the Watson like police detective also has a bit more about him as well:
“Look here, Peter,” said the other with some earnestness, “suppose you get this playing-fields-of-Eton complex out of your system once and for all.”
And then there is this:
“I remember so well that dreadful trouble there was about her marrying a Jew”
“… I’m sure some Jews are very good people …”
“A good Jew can be a good man …”
Here there is no escape from the antisemitism of the time.
It’s an introduction to a series but it has many problems. The series can only get better, but I am not in a great hurry to go on to the second.

I understand Sayers is a master and one of the classic mystery writers, in the vein of Agatha Christie. However, I don't find her writing to be as good as Christie's, actually I dislike a lot of her writing style.

Lord Peter Wimsey says the most RIDICULOUS stuff sometimes. He quotes random poetry that is bizarre all the time. He leaves his 'g's off of the end of his gerunds: believin', reckenin', understandin' - and it drives me NUTS.

Another thing I dislike about the novel is all the anti-Semitism. It's Jews this and Jews that and 'oh, you know how those Jews are' and 'He was a good man in spite of being a Jew,' and 'Jews are monsters for circumcising babies', and blah blah blah. It really gives me the shudders, especially since lately in the real world it seems like anti-Semitism is making a strong comeback.

The mystery is good. I mean, it's set up well and makes sense.

However, Sayers just cannot get to the point. She draws certain stuff out for far too long, delighting in scenes where nothing is happening in relation to the case.

Also, I'd figured out who-dun-it about halfway through the book and from there it was a long slog towards Wimsey 'getting his man.'

There were a few stellar lines. The two that stood out the most were:

His long, amiable face looked as if it had generated spontaneously from his top hat, as white maggots breed from Gorgonzola.

This was seriously disgusting - and she was describing our hero Wimsey with this line! But it was a good line, and I expected more like this, but I didn't get any.

The only other line that really grabbed me was when Wimsey's about to be killed by the murderer and he grabs the murderer's wrist in an iron grip:

When lovers embrace, there seems no sound in the world but their own breathing. So the two men breathed face to face.

Wow. I thought that was very good writing. However, it's so few and far between it's definitely not a reason to pick this book up.

In short - If you're interested in mystery classics, then it makes sense to pick this up. But Sayers is no Christie, that's for sure!

Originally published in 1923, this is the first book in the Lord Peter Wimsey series. I snapped it up on Prime Reading and added it to my summer reading.

Lord Peter was hampered in his career as a private detective by a public school education. Despite Parker's admonitions, he was not always able to discount it. His mind had been warped in its young growth by " Raffles" and " Sherlock Holmes" or the sentiments for which they stand. He belonged to a family which had never shot a fox.

The WWI veteran finds himself drawn into a strange case, a man has been found in a bathtub and the police believe that the owner is the murderer. With his trusty Bunter at his side, Lord Peter will need to dig down deep to solve this mysterious puzzle.

Competent, of course, but no imagination. I want imagination in a criminal.

I enjoyed the mystery and Lord Peter certainly has his charms. A detective that also enjoys theatrical performances and discussing literature is quite entertaining. Although these days, Agatha Christie appears to be more talked about in terms of British mystery writers, there is no doubt that Dorothy Sayers is equally entertaining.

Goodreads review published 29/07/20

Anyone who has ever read a post from my blog, The Mustache and the Beard, or even my Goodreads reviews knows that I despise trashing other people’s work. I genuinely WANT to love everything I read or watch, but this was an absolute trial to finish. I was simply just bored. I had heard that if you love Agatha Christie, then you will love Whose Body by Dorothy Sayers. Not the case. They lied. Here, I got this as an Audible book, and I just could not get into Lord Peter Wimsey as an armchair / amateur detective. Maybe it's the tongue-in-cheek flippant attitude despite the murder mystery milieu, or the silliness of mother. I get the "Wimsey," but no thanks. I liked that the mystery involves a dead body found in a bathtub wearing only pince-nez glasses, but the killer strikes me as self-evident from inception, and to me it was poorly conceived. I am OK with having read it completely, but I am not sure if I would read anything else by Dorothy Sayers. With all deference and due respect, I found her a poor substitute for Agatha Christie.

3 1/2 stars for my second ever Dorothy L Sayers read.

I don't believe I have ever read a book that has quite as much dialogue as this one!

'It might have been burglars.....remember that next time you leave a window open all night; this time it was a dead man.......but next time it might be burglars.'

One man disappears and a body is found in a bathtub. Not in the bathtub of the man who has disappeared, but in that of someone totally unrelated! Is the body that of Rueben Levy? It bears a superficial resemblance.....but Sir Peter Wimsey at once spies something that precludes this being so and sets out to investigate.

Dorothy L Sayers so well mastered the art of writing with wit that it is an absolute delight to read her work. One of my favourite lines is : 'Even idiots occasionally speak the truth accidentally.'

I am looking forward to reading my way through her works.

Somewhere between 2 and 2.5 stars... Oh dear. I remember loving this series back in the day, but this was definitely not my favorite entry. There were parts I enjoyed (such as the writing itself, the dynamic with Peter & Bunter, the idea of the solution), but I do think it would have been much more successful as a short story rather than as a novel. It felt very drawn out, and I didn't really care for Lord Peter... which doesn't bode well for my future with this reading project... :/

Mr. Thipps goes to have his morning bath, only to find the corpse of a naked man wearing only a pince nez in the tub. A first glance, the corpse appears to be that of Lord Levy, a Jewish financier. Only things aren't always as they seem. Fortunately, Lord Peter Wimsey is on the case...

I really liked this one. I have to believe Dorothy Sayers was influenced by P.G. Wodehouse at least a little bit. Lord Peter Wimsey could easily be a Wodehouse character. He's a short pompous British aristocrat, shell-shocked from WWI, who solves mysteries for fun and has a decidedly Wodehousian manner about him. His manservant, Bunter, doubles as his Watson.

The writing is good although I thought the dialogue was a little long-winded at times. The mystery was well done. There were more than enough suspects and it took me forever to pick out the killer.

I'd recommend this to mystery fans especially those of British mysteries. Sayers's writing is like Agatha Christie with a hint of Wodehouse. Quite enjoyable. I'll be reading more of Wimsey's cases, that's for sure.

I found a quote online that describes Dorothy L. Sayers, as "A refined author with a talent for wry mysteries spiced with quotations of verse and observations about English society." She is most famous for creating her Lord Peter Wimsey character, an aristocratic sleuth who assists the police in solving complex cases.

This is the first volume in the Lord Peter Wimsey series, which is one of several series I am working through over time. I had attempted to read it several years ago, however it was a case of the wrong book at the wrong time. I am happy to report that I thoroughly enjoyed it this time around.

The story starts with someone finding a body in their bathtub. A complex mystery ensues. I loved the writing, which is of another time.

Illustrative quote:

"Mr. Alfred Phipps was a small nervous man, whose flaxen hair was beginning to abandon the unequal struggle with destiny. One might say that his only really marked feature was a large bruise over the left eyebrow, which gave him a faintly dissipated air incongruous with the rest of his appearance."

This book fails miserably as a mystery novel. It is plain as day who the murderer is right from the beginning, but flagrantly obvious clues are persistently ignored solely for the sake of prolonging the book. It is a failure as a piece of writing, too: it's peopled with ridiculously typological characters - a typical butler, a typical aristocrat, a typical Scotland Yard officer etc., and it drags on and on, despite its relatively small size, as half of the book consists of lenghty, redundant conversations, which aim at being witty and entertaining, but induce only boredom verging on annoyance. Moreover, it is INSUFFERABLY elitist. This 20th century novel somehow manages to be more snobbish than many a 19th c. work, and that's something. I don't even want to know whence Sayers got the idea that Peter Wimsey, an irresponsible, idle blue-blood running around interrupting other people's work, ironising about "democracy" and "equality", good-humouredly patronising people who, unlike him, are paid for actually doing something, and pampered like a little baby by his butler, is a likeable character. Discrimination of lower classes goes as far as stating that members of the working class all have a similar, primitive shape of head. What exactly is meant by that is not clear. For a woman so well educated, and fighting against discrimination herself, Sayers sure judges others by their cover. Superficiality is the main theme of Whose Body?: plot-wise, stylistically and ideologically.