FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2765450177> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2765450177 endingPage "168" @default.
• W2765450177 startingPage "146" @default.
• W2765450177 abstract "Writing Gender Identity through Musical Metaphor in Dorothy L. Sayers’s Gaudy Night Stephen Armstrong (bio) You [Donald Tovey] are one of the very few people with intelligent sympathy for Lord Peter and his Harriet. Most of them beg me not to let him marry “that horrid girl.” They don’t understand that there is a violent conflict underlying her obstinacy—I am glad you do. There’s stuff in Harriet, but it isn’t the conventional heroine stuff, you see. My only reason for holding her up is that the situation between her and Lord is so psychologically difficult that it really needs a whole book to examine and resolve. . . . But in the howl of execration that will go up when I marry Lord Peter off, I shall hope to hear your voice uplifted in defense of his happiness and of Harriet! —Dorothy L. Sayers, letter of 18 January 19341 In her visionary and politically charged novel Gaudy Night (1935), Dorothy L. Sayers (1893–1957) infuses the intricate texture of the golden age detective story with the tempestuous conflicts of courtly romance and feminist politics, setting the action in a fictional women’s college in Oxford and constructing the plot around the theme of intellectual integrity.2 Yet literary critics argue over whether Sayers compromised her feminist and aesthetic positions by her treatment of the traditional comic ending: after solving the mystery together, the wealthy amateur detective Lord Peter Wimsey proposes to heroine Harriet Vane, and in accepting his [End Page 146] advances, Vane gets to keep both her man and her career as a mystery writer.3 Sayers resolves this dissonance by closing Gaudy Night with an extended musical metaphor, creating a sophisticated and flexible platform from which to negotiate her first-wave feminist identity without disrupting the narrative integrity of the work. Sayers occupies an intriguing and somewhat controversial place in English literature. One of the foremost writers and critics of detective fiction in her day, Sayers invested her Lord Peter mysteries with the stylish prose and wide-ranging allusions of the literary novel; the more sophisticated themes and characterizations of the later books stretched generic boundaries.4 Lavishing such care on an ostensibly middlebrow genre polarized critics, who found her ambitious approach either revelatory or insufferably pretentious. Carolyn Heilbrun—feminist scholar, detective novelist, and sometime president of the Modern Language Association—claims that Sayers “wrote superbly well. . . . Her command of the language was . . . dangerously near to deserving the epithet unique.”5 More fastidious critics such as Edmund Wilson and Q. D. Leavis beg to differ. In his 1945 essay “Who Cares Who Killed Roger Ackroyd?” Wilson attacked detective fiction in general and Sayers in particular: “[Sayers] does not write very well: it is simply that she is more consciously literary than most of the other detective-story writers and that she thus attracts attention in a field which is mostly on a sub-literary level.”6 Leavis was particularly outraged by Sayers’s penchant for literary allusion; he objected to her displaying “knowingness about literature without any sensitiveness to it or any feeling for quality. . . . [S]he has an academic literary taste over and above having no general taste at all.”7 According to Catherine Kenney, Sayers became increasingly unfashionable in the United Kingdom toward the end of the twentieth century, [End Page 147] possibly because of the work of critic Julian Symons.8 Yet Sayers has undergone something of a revival since the turn of the millennium: the complex interplay of gender, class, power, and disability in Sayers’s fiction has attracted the attention of scholars such as Joel Armstrong, Crystal Downing, Martha Greene Eads, Ariela Freedman, Sean Latham, Ethan Lewis, Monica Lott, Marya McFadden, Robert Kuhn McGregor, and Laurel Young.9 Literary style and gender politics are not the only controversies within Sayers’s novels. Wilson particularly disliked the extended musical references in The Nine Tailors (1934), attacking the novel as “one of the dullest books I have ever encountered in any field” in part because it “contains a lot of information of the kind that you might expect to find in an encyclopedia article on campanology.”10 (Perhaps unsurprisingly, campanologists did not..." @default.
• W2765450177 created "2017-11-10" @default.
• W2765450177 creator A5073316011 @default.
• W2765450177 date "2017-01-01" @default.
• W2765450177 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2765450177 title "Writing Gender Identity through Musical Metaphor in Dorothy L. Sayers’s Gaudy Night" @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1507659593 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1521373672 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1524533045 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1526354203 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1528522693 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1531218835 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1554389670 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1556988431 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1563578478 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1573583668 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1576707378 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1901571987 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W1993530227 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2001732221 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2014155387 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2021937207 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2023587528 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2024832230 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2033182583 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2036102676 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2046108576 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2047275707 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2055656105 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2070670106 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2072067549 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2081591853 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2082026702 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2090145265 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2164867600 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2313499845 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2313614983 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2321056334 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2327813510 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2333734908 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W2795486336 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W3128914413 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W325074943 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W567298199 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W574001389 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W576427271 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W577762216 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W596318798 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W617766841 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W619986800 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W652058969 @default.
• W2765450177 cites W86790761 @default.
• W2765450177 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/wam.2017.0009" @default.
• W2765450177 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W2765450177 type Work @default.
• W2765450177 sameAs 2765450177 @default.
• W2765450177 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2765450177 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2765450177 hasAuthorship W2765450177A5073316011 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C105795698 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C107993555 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C111919701 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C167651023 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C2777688943 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C2778311575 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C2778355321 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C2779115301 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C33566652 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C558565934 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C105795698 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C107038049 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C107993555 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C11171543 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C111919701 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C124952713 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C138885662 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C142362112 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C144024400 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C15744967 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C167651023 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C17744445 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C199539241 @default.
• W2765450177 hasConceptScore W2765450177C27206212 @default.

• next