LOOK BACK IN ANGER!

I try not to force modern opinions on older books. It’s just not fair. No matter how often I may wince, I can’t rewrite the history of social development.

That’s my first disclaimer. My second is that I am a fan of Margery Allingham’s, and I have read all her work, probably several times over.

Recently I reread THE FASHION IN SHROUDS, which I thought would be extra entertaining. I am a diehard Project Runway fan, and since this book is set in the fashion industry at least partly, I was anticipating big fun. Albert Campion’s sister, Val, is a very successful dress designer, and has single-handedly resuscitated a dying fashion house. Val has met a man, Alan Dell, who owns an airplane manufacturing company, so he’s a successful executive (and creator), too, though he is still on the rise while Val is at the top of her game. It’s worthy of note that Amanda Fitton, Campion’s future fiancé, is an engineer at Dell’s company. (Yay! A big thumbs up.)

Alan falls for the actress Georgia Wells. Her first husband’s skeleton has just been found, and during the course of the book, her current husband is murdered. That doesn’t give Alan pause. But in the course of the book, the scales fall from his eyes, and he sees what’s right in front of him. He takes Val for a walk, and here’s what he says: “. . . Will you marry me and give up your independence, the enthusiasm which you give your career, your time and your thought? . . .In return . . . I should assume all responsibility for you. I would pay all your bills to any amount which my income might afford. I would make all decisions which were not directly in your province, but on the other hand I would like to feel that I might discuss everything with you if I wanted to; but only because I wanted to, mind you; not as your right. And until I died you would be the only woman. You would be my care, my mate as in plumber, my possession if you like.”

There’s more that’s just as horrifying, but you get the idea. And Val, a capable businesswoman with an international reputation, can hardly wait to jump at this chance.

Here’s the thing: obviously Allingham herself was no one’s possession. She was a talented and celebrated writer. Her husband collaborated with her. I’ll bet he didn’t tell her not to bother her pretty little head with paying bills.

Or am I being the revisionist I have tried not to be? Does this make you wince, too?

Charlaine Harris

Comments

[Marcia Talley]

Eeeeew! Cringe-worthy indeed.

[Elaine Viets]

Horrifying! Even worse, as you point out Allingham herself was nothing like that. Was she pandering to the times? I have problems reading a lot of "golden age" mysteries because of the authors' portrayal of women as either servants or mindless creatures who give up their identity to become possessions.

[Charlaine Harris]

Thank goodness you agree. I had to read it twice to believe it, even in the context of the times.

[hank Phillippi Ryan]

Oh, I think it's fascinating--and shows how far our consciounesses (?) have been raised. Wouldn't you love to ask her about that?

[Kay]

Was it said 'tongue in cheek'? And what is that about 'my mate as in plumber'? What? I laughed out loud as I read this. It's so ridiculous. I think about my grandmothers, both farm women and not educated, but certainly opinionated. They would both raise their eyebrows and snort at this. They were tough broads. LOL

[Charlaine Harris]

I would, because she made a career and life for herself that lasted quite a while and many books. I just can't reconcile her reality with that speech. And the man, who is presented as admirable, was dead serious about what he was asking her.

[Dean (Miranda) James]

Readers often forget that there is a character in the book who is the direct opposite of Val, and that's Amanda Fitton. Amanda works as an engineer in an aeronautics firm, in itself an unusual feat, and she keeps on working there even after marriage. I think Allingham intended Val to be a comment on the path that so many women chose in those days, when they certainly had other options. Val, despite her brilliance as a designer and a businesswoman, ultimately chooses to shroud herself in her husband's life and give up her own. I don't think Allingham presents Val as particularly admirable, and Alan Dell doesn't come off all that well either, being foolishly blind over Georgia Wells. In the end, I think Val is rather a sad character who lacks the courage to continue to follow her own path, unlike Amanda, who after all is the true heroine in the series.

[Dean (Miranda) James]

By the way, Charlaine, I am currently re-reading the book myself. :-) But the above comment expresses my thoughts both from this re-reading and from when I originally read the book thirty years ago.

[Claudia]

I hated it at the end of Evil under the sun, by Agatha Christie, when another manly man asked another strong woman the same question. You got the feeling the only reason she had a career at all is that he hadn't asked her to marry him sooner.

Most of Dorothy Sayers' Gaudy night was dedicated to the question of whether or not intelligent women should marry. Harriet Vane certainly never gave up her career, even after marriage and children.

[Donna M Williams More]

I just read it for the first time recently. It was jarring, a sour note, because of the specific character. She'd defied her family, she'd built a business, she knew he was an idiot, and yet still she said yes. I decided Allingham had written it that way to show just how stupid it did seem, to make a point that way.

[Charlaine Harris]

Dean, I didn't forget about Amanda. She's such a lively character, and the fact that she's an engineer is marvelous. I just found the proposal scene overwhelmingly off-putting. I had to revise my opinion of both characters.

Claudia, Gaudy Night is certainly a study in whether intelligent women should marry. Harriet is such a singular character, and all her academic friends really made the book fascinating.

Donna, I hope so. Since Val was Campion's sister, I guess I expected her to be just as admirable. And I did admire her achievements, a lot. But in the end, she disappointed me so much.

[Jane Hotchkiss]

Yes, it bothered me a lot when I read it 40 years ago. But I also remembered that Val had been raised as the daughter of aristocracy with family expectation of marrying "well."