I'm going to park these musings here so that I can, with luck, find them again later. I will not be offended if they are not of interest to anyone else and apologize for cluttering up the board, but it's really very convenient for me and the possibility of dialog about it is pretty enticing.
Anyway.
I've been listening to the BBC Radio Lord Peter Wimsey adaptations that were apparently concurrent with one of the TV adaptations (mostly, Gaudy Night wasn't broadcast until 2010 and the rest were I think early 80s) mostly because while reading Clouds of Witness I had a strong sense memory of hearing one of the lines of dialog that made me remember that I heard some of these come on after Hitchhiker's Guide when I was in high school and that is very likely what prompted me to go looking for Sayers in the library in the first place. Also because I haven't watched the TV adaptations yet and I'm generally interested in judging how adaptations stack up to novels (unless I am too emotionally invested in the novel in question and can't risk the adaptation being terrible, but that isn't true of these).
There were definitely points where hearing the dialog rather than reading it made things clear that had been obscure. As St George says at one point, the family charm does not live on the page. Well, it must to some extent, but between the difficulty on parsing tone in print and 80-100 years of history between publication and me reading it today I can't always interpret the intention behind the words on my own.
They are abridged, of course, and they mostly manage to cut out the bits I don't like while keeping what I do like, so that works out well. There are some of my favorite bits from Have His Carcase and Gaudy Night that didn't make it in, which is too bad, but you can't have everything. Busman's Honeymoon especially benefits, I think. IIRC, it was a play before it was a novel, and I am starting to think that when Sayers made it a novel she just threw in whatever popped into her head without thinking about it very much
So I'm thinking about Busman's Honeymoon and how sometimes when we are in Peter's head he seems very un-Peter-like and that made me think of the Big Lebowski and I have been the seized by the idea that the eventual monograph or thesis or whatever that all this should be leading to will have to include a chapter or so on how the Dude embodies the traditional amateur detective, perhaps especially the gentleman detective. The dressing gown and the bathrobe. The leisure time. Being dragged into the investigation by personal involvement. It's rough but I want to keep it in mind.