The Casual Vacancy & Lord Peter Wimsey

[donnaimmaculata]

So, the posting challenge that has been going around has finally inspired me to make a post with fannish contents. This makes me very proud (I'm easily pleased).

Over a month ago, I finally read JK Rowling's The Casual Vacancy. (I actually wanted to make a post about it straightaway, but... yeah

Comments

[shocolate]

1) I loved it, too - all such fallible, petty, normal people.

2) agreed, but we've had the Inspector Lynley Mysteries quite recently, with the earl!detective.

[donnaimmaculata]

1) I also very much admired how she wrote about small-town, middle-class bigotry and managed to not recycle the Dursleys!

2) Hm, would you believe I've never really watched the Inspector Lynley Mysteries? I caught a few episodes on German telly, but since they're dubbed, it doesn't really count.

[shocolate]

2) they're not that great - despite Dan's mother doing the original casting - but they are recent.

Although, of course, they're present day, so a period Wimsey series shouldn't really be an issue.

[donnaimmaculata]

so a period Wimsey series shouldn't really be an issue

Exactly. Especially since the Twenties came back en vogue lately in the wake of The Great Gatsby.

[pauraque]

I recently read The Casual Vacancy too, and keep meaning to post about it. I found it a really surreal read because JKR's author voice is so distinctive that it was hard to shake the feeling that I was reading a HP book! But I think that's more an issue with me than with the book itself.

[donnaimmaculata]

See, it was the exact opposite with me: Whilst I do agree that she's got a distinctive author voice, the novel did not make me think of Harry Potter at all. To the point that I was surprised that so many reviewers drew parallels among or comparisons between The Casual Vacancy and the HP novels. The only thing that occurred to me after I'd finished reading was what I mentioned above: that she did not recycle the Dursleys, even though, with a few minor adjustments, they would have fit very well into the world of Pagford.

[magnetic_pole]

Ah, another recommendation for the Casual Vacancy! I'll have to try it. I also love

novels in which nothing of any earth-shattering relevance happens, that dissect the lives of ordinary people, provide a social commentary of close-knit (and narrow-minded) communities, where everybody is self-righteous and prejudiced and in some way or another a horrible human being.

:) In fact, that line alone is convincing me I need to go to the library.

Have you seen the Lord Peter Wimsey adaptations from the 80s? I remember watching them with my parents while growing up. I wonder if the success of Sherlock will inspire some more updates of the "classic" mysteries series. M.

[donnaimmaculata]

Oh, if you like that kind of novel, you will like it - especially since you like JK Rowling's characters. The Casual Vacancy is a great character study of deeply human, unhappy (for the most part) people.

I saw bits of the Lord Peter adaptation on YouTube, but that wasn't the Lord Peter I pictured when reading the books. He should be younger, I feel, and rather more playful. That's why I can picture David Tennant in this role: as a chatty, playful, foppish young man, crackling with energy.

I'm currently reading Murder Must Advertise, and I am struck at how very modern it feels. The beauty about the Lord Peter Wimsey novels is that they could be easily adapted as period dramas - with pretty costumes and the debonair Twenties charm -, and yet many of the issues raised in them are quite contemporary.

[donnaimmaculata]

I've just realised I'd confused the two existing adaptations: the 70s one with Ian Carmichael, who is just. Plain. Wrong, and the one that you probably had in mind: the one from the 80s with Edward Petherbridge, who looks right for the part (albeit too old). I will have to do some more research, I think.

[magnetic_pole]

I didn't realize there were two versions--I haven't even heard of the Carmichael ones. But, re: above, I agree with you entirely about the age issue and the cosmopolitan glamor of the 20s. Someone should take this idea and run with it! (Any television producers reading this journal? They should be!) M.

[hippediva]

Best adaptation of Lord Peter was done in with Edward Petherbridge back in the 80s. He was practically perfect (as opposed to Ian Carmichael ones---I am a longtime Lord Peter fan and I always hated Carmichael in the role---top big, too bulky, just too much. Petherbridge had the wonderfully effete nervousness and made his Peter absolutely note-perfection. His DVDs are available as the Peter Wimsey/Harriet Vane collection and are worth every cent!

[donnaimmaculata]

Oh, I've just realised I confused the 70s and the 80s adaptations in my comment above and claimed the 80s Peter was too old and wrong. "Effete nervousness" sounds just about right (even though the actor was still too old to play Lord Peter, by about 20 years!). Ian Carmichael was definitely wrong. He looks nothing like Lord Peter; he could have played Peter's twinkly great-uncle, but not Peter himself, who is much more frail and nervy.

[hippediva]

Petherbridge was yes, a bit old for the early stories, but he was actually spot-on age wise in the later ones (Peter is in his mid 40s when he finally marries Harriet). And he really had the nerves and such down---part of my problem with Carmichael was I could never imagine him being so emotionally fragile as to need Bunter the way Peter does, particular after solving a case and getting a conviction...I always loved that life/death angst that tears him to pieces and brings on his PTSD. My absolutely fave (and my sister's) is The Nine Tailors, closely followed by Gaudy Night which was also a fantastic production that they filmed at Oxford.

[donnaimmaculata]

I've started reading the novels in order and have just arrived at The Nine Tailors. That would make Lord Peter about 45, but to me, he's still in his 30s, because I've read them all within the space of four weeks and he didn't have time to age, so to speak. But that's my problem, not that of E. Petherbridge.

Agreed on Ian Carmichael. From the bits I saw on YouTube, I feel he brings across the personable, charming side of Lord Peter's character, but not its damaged, brittle aspect. The novels between Clouds of Witness and Murder Must Advertise are relatively angst-free - as in: there's no breakdown, but I know there's one coming in The Nine Tailors.

[donnaimmaculata]

There's a 70s adaptation with Ian Carmichael (who looks nothing like Lord Peter) and an 80s adaptation with Edward Petherbridge, who's supposed to be excellent, albeit too old. I'm greedy, I want a contemporary adaptation that caters to my needs and sensibilities as a modern viewer.

[houseboatonstyx]

It's not just that Carmichael looks sturdy. His whole attitude seems wrong. I think he uses the banter and such as manipulation, to keep other people off balance, almost aggressively. And in his Harlequin costume he was certainly mean to the girl in the forest.

The Harriet of the 80s adaptations would have been repelled. I wonder what kind of Harriet WOULD like him?

[donnaimmaculata]

I didn't see enough of the Carmichael adaptation to be able to judge on his overall attitude and especially his interactions with others. From the bits that I saw, I did find his Lord Peter too overbearing - and his sturdy physique certainly helped to convey this impression. I'm not surprised that, as you say, he uses the banter and such as manipulation, to keep other people off balance, almost aggressively - he doesn't seem to be wrecked by self-doubt. Whereas the canonical Peter has an artist's ego: huge, yet fragile.

And you're right: Harriet from the 80s adaptations would recoil when he leans across the table and asks, "You don't positively find me repellent, do you?"