I took CF 's comment as a joke, as it’s a sort of joke in the books.
And knowing correct ways to address folks is a joke in a lot of books of that period dealing with class distinctions.
I almost wrote “ha” after her post
The Harriet Vane books:
Strong Poison, Have His Carcase, Gaudy Night, Busmans Holiday
So much to love, all sadly off topic
Yes, definitely – I laughed when I read it. Here’s Mr. Milligan’s quote that @mathmom referred to above:
I thought Milligan’s error was also a subtle jab at the Ignorant American.
Thank you!! I kept trying to think of who she (and their relationship) reminded me of – and that’s exactly it.
Sorry, it was really the two posts telling me my impressions were wrong that I saw as “corrections”. Perhaps bored was not the the best word. But I still think in this book Lord Peter does not have a strong moral objection, and Christie’s detectives do.
Less obvious for sure, but that’s exactly what it means. I looked up Adolf Beck (meant nothing to me) and discovered that Beck and Smith were the subjects of a famous case of wrongful conviction by mistaken identity, and that “in May 1898 an official at the Home Office looked at the Smith file and saw that Smith was Jewish and thus had been circumcised, while Beck was not.”
So @VeryHappy, you can rest assured that Lord Peter understood immediately what he was looking at. 
Were all the details about the teeth and the calluses on the hands added to replace the circumcision reference, then??
I think Lord Peter does ruminate on the moral question. He is greatly troubled by the idea that his “hobby” may–does–result in an unpleasant end for another person (even if that person is a murderer who deserves his fate). But I agree with you when I compare him to Parker. (I’m not familiar enough with Christie’s detectives to make any comparison there.)
Parker has a clearer moral focus as regards the responsibility of the detective. He chides Lord Peter at one point:
To which Lord Peter has the fabulous comeback, “I don’t think you ought to read so much theology…It has a brutalizing influence.”
The circumcision reference remains in both versions; it’s just worded differently in each one (“pious Jew” observation vs. Smith/Beck comment).
In a mystery written today, an author wouldn’t have to be so circumspect!
A brief summary of the Smith/Beck case can be found at the link that @stradmom shared in post #48: http://www.dandrake.com/wimsey/whos.html
(Lots of good stuff in that link!)
Back to Lord Peter’s moral compass for a second: It’s not just being bothered by the “sport” (or lack thereof) of catching a murderer that bothers him. I think he is also conflicted about disturbing the status quo. I’m not talking about social status; I mean the fact that his actions will have a domino effect on the lives of innocent people as well as guilty ones. This is made clear as he waits for his appointment in the doctor’s office, looks around and sees all the patients who rely on Dr. Freke, and speaks with the mother who views the doctor as a saint for all he has done for her daughter. Even though Freke may have provided that help out of medical curiosity rather than compassion, it is help nonetheless, and his imprisonment will be a great loss to that mother and child. I think Lord Peter feels this acutely.
Marilyn, I’ve been reading Sayers for 40 years and still don’t understand everything she’s writing, especially all the allusions, even though I do a bunch of googling, because she was Oxford educated and I am not. Far from it! I’m sure she didn’t mean to be obscure, but is for modern readers. She means to be funny.
It’s really interesting (at least to me) to realize she and Christie are contemporaries, but with very different backgrounds. Both are really successful writers, but maybe they are writing for different audiences? I’m just throwing that out there; have no idea.
And now I have to wonder: who stands the test of time better? Probably Christie, imho.
eta… Except of course we have to rename her books to display on a shelf or amazon. Neither author stands the test of time with regard to offensive racial stereotyping.
Just for reference, here’s a Miss Marple quote:
I did notice when I was trying to figure out whether I had actually read any Agatha Christie’s before that she had a fondness for book titles from nursery rhymes.
@alh and other Sayer/ Christie fans many thanks for the excellent suggestions, I do want to read more of these books,
@mary13 I also found Wimsey’s remark very amusing - “
I liked that Sayer’s addressed Wimsey’s moral complexity, especially if he knew the suspects personally?
I liked that Sayer’s explored post traumatic stress, shell shock, and the matters of subconscious.
This is the poem quoted as Wimsey suffers from PTSD, and his conflict knowing that Freke is guilty.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43991/kubla-khan
Apparently, Samuel Coleridge had visions while using opium, both beautiful and dark, perfect poem exploring Wimsey’s deep Psychic scars From Ww1.
In comparison.,Christie’s murder mystery lacked this depth of character development as others here have mentioned.
This was such an excellent pairing, how was it decided ?
Kubla Khan… some lines from the poem
…
[quote]
And ’mid this tumult Kubla heard from far
Ancestral voices prophesying war!
The shadow of the dome of pleasure
Floated midway on the waves;
Where was heard the mingled measure
From the fountain and the caves.
It was a miracle of rare device,
A sunny pleasure-dome with caves of ice!
Yes – appropriate because Lord Peter quotes this poem just moments before he has the epiphany which throws him into a PTSD episode. Of course, he doesn’t quote it for that reason, but because he is trying to remember something that stubbornly eludes him. As the story goes, when Coleridge was writing the poem, he was interrupted by “a person from Porlock” and then could not finish it because the interruption caused him to forget his dream.
I really like the CC book discussions. I liked Whose Body? when I read it but am gaining a greater understanding and appreciation of it from the posts - particularly those who have long been fans of Lord Peter. Thank you.
I had planned to continue the series but now look forward to doing so with even greater enthusiasm.
^ I liked they way Sayer’s explores the subconscious, and memory.
Using the medical student’s ability to recall working with the cadaver to reveal how memory works, how to recall details. Sayer’s cleverly allows the reader to take that journey.
Once we’ve finished discussing a book we talk about what we were reading and what we were thinking about reading next. And everyone throws out suggestions and we look at past suggestions and consider adding them to the list. I think there was a consensus that after Middlemarch we were all ready for something lighter. Most of us, even one who loved the book, had a hard time concentrating on it. Usually we vote, but sometimes the discussion makes a vote unnecessary. This time Mary13 made an executive decision to choose two book that were available free on line. We have never actually covered mysteries, so that was also a plus. I don’t know if Mary realized how well they would fit together.
I found an interesting blog about this:
More here: http://mysteryreadersinc.blogspot.com/2010/09/agatha-christie-and-nursery-rhymes.html
From the discussion questions:
I thought someone was hiding in a secret room somewhere. I had no idea what the connection between the hidden person and all the others would be, but I held on to the belief for quite a while. Christie was trying to lead us to Dr. Armstrong. The doctor was always in the vicinity when there was a death, but that choice seemed too obvious to be correct.