P.D. James, “Death Comes to Pemberley”

Oh, dear. I had such high hopes for Death Comes to Pemberley. I’m not a big fan of the  mash-up and I’m traditional enough to believe that Miss Austen’s work shouldn’t be meddled with. But surely, if anyone was going to write a murder mystery sequel to Pride and Prejudice, P.D. James was a good candidate. You’d need an author who could construct a plausible murder mystery and at the same time respect the context provided by the source material.

But, you know, maybe this project was doomed from the start. (Or maybe I’m a terrible crank: my online trawling showed me that many reviews have been terrific, so possibly I’m the only one complaining.) Austen’s comedy depends on distance: the narrator stands back from her characters to discreetly point out their silliness. Mysteries suck you in: they drop you into the middle of the action so you can undergo the ritual progress from disequilibrium to restoration of order. The author’s choice of narrative distance in any fiction determines how the reader perceives the action. James mandate was to create a mystery, so she stays with a fairly naturalistic, involved-in-the-action position. You’d almost have to — but as a result, Death Comes to Pemberley loses the light touch of its antecedent.

Rupert Friend as George Wickham. You know who the girl is.

And there’s another issue: we’re in 1803, among the British upper class, a group legendary for their restraint and stately behavior. James does a pretty good job mimicking the goings-on of the Longbourn/Pemberley set, but she’s stifled by the retro language. There’s a scene at the end of the book which should provide high drama, but James can’t use any of our modern tricks of pacing and vocabulary to speed up the action and it falls flat. Even more weirdly, the tale resides primarily in the consciousness of Mr. Darcy and his now-wife Elizabeth (formerly Elizabeth Bennet). And they turn out to be — vapid! Of course James can’t endow them with post-Freudian consciousness, but when you take away Austen’s arch observation, there’s very little individuality left to them. Strangely, it’s the bumptious near-caricature Lydia Bennet (now Wickham) who survives with something like a personality.

The plotting is probably the most successful part of the book. Again, the basic premise shackles the author: somebody has to die, and somebody has to be found responsible for the death. But in Jane Austen’s world we can’t call in Adam Dalgliesh. So on a dark, stormy night in the Pemberley woods, an army captain is mysteriously done to death and it’s George Wickham who is found kneeling at his side, lamenting that he has killed his best friend. Awkward, since Wickham was the irresistible rake in Pride and Prejudice. He and Darcy sort of … simmer at each other throughout the book. (Politely, with gritted teeth.) There’s considerable exposition about early 19th-century criminal procedure, and two trial scenes, narrated with some relish in the period details — but little suspense. Which for me, pretty much sums up the whole novel.

About carolwallace

I spend most of my time writing and reading. Most recent publications: the reissue of "To Marry an English Lord,"one of the inspirations for "Downton Abbey," and the historical novel "Leaving Van Gogh." I am too cranky to belong to a book group but I love the book-blogging community.
This entry was posted in anglophilia, mystery and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to P.D. James, “Death Comes to Pemberley”

  1. Anbolyn says:

    I checked this out from the library and just had a bad feeling about it – so I turned it back in! I like both P.D. James and Jane Austen enough to not want either of them spoiled by this mash-up. I’ve read other thoughts similar to yours since and am glad I decided to let it go.

  2. carolwallace says:

    You were smarter than I was, Anbolyn. The prologue looked OK, but the further in I got, the more distressed I was. For both of them. But the reviews are really good. I just don’t get it!

  3. Ginny Arndt says:

    Darn. I was going to give this book as a Christmas gift to a Jane Austen fan. Now I’ll have to think again.

  4. carolwallace says:

    Ginny, take a look at it yourself. There have been lots of really positive reviews so you may feel differently from the way I did!

  5. Pingback: Follow my book blog, “Book Group of One” | | Carol Wallace BooksCarol Wallace Books

  6. Pingback: Jo Baker, “Longbourn” | Book Group of One

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s