Scan barcode
adamrshields's review
slow-paced
2.5
Summary: An exploration of the thought of Dorothy Sayers.
I picked up Subversive because it was free to me as part of the Audible Plus Catalogue (books that Audible subscribers can borrow without additional cost other than the membership.) I have been slowly working through a couple of books by Sayers a year over the past decade. I have finished all of her Wimsey full novels, and both read and listened to her play cycle, A Man Born to be King. I also read a book about Sayers and CS Lewis' friendship and the lost novel that Jill Patton Walsh finished. I was not new to Dorothy Sayers, but I am also not a scholar of Sayers, so I am a bit wary of being annoyed by this book but without enough academic background to defend my annoyance well.
I think part of the problem is that I came in with inappropriate expectations. I was expecting an exploration of Sayers' ideas but more biography. Subversive is not a biography; it is closer, instead, an attempt to introduce modern readers to Sayers, someone who is fairly unknown but who has exerted much influence. Because I was expecting more biographical details, I am sure my unmet expectations played a role in being annoyed by Subversive.
I kept reading because I learned a lot and wanted to know more about Sayers. Downing introduced me to aspects of Sayers I did not know, and while I thought about putting it down several times, it was short enough and helpful enough to keep listening.
My main complaint is that it felt like Downing was appropriating Sayers. Given Downings' main point, that Sayers was subversively pushing mid-century British Christians to think more clearly about culture and their Christianity and underlying intellectual biases, it feels like I am likely wrong in that perception. But I have come to distrust authors who do not push back against their subject in at least some fashion. This is an uncharitable comparison, but I can't think of a better one. After all of the hype around it, I picked up Eric Metaxas' biography of Wilberforce and hated it. Metaxas was not telling the reader about Wilberforce as much as he was transforming Wilberforce for his own purposes. And then, when Metaxas' biography of Bonhoeffer came out, I may have skipped it, but I was offered a free copy for review, and it had a glowing introduction by Tim Keller. But as is well detailed in The Battle for Bonhoeffer and, to some extent, the Biography of Letters and Papers from Prison, Metaxas did not so much write a biography but a hagiography that appropriated aspects of Bonhoeffer while distorting his actual ideas.
I know enough about Sayers to know that her ideas do not fit nicely in our modern world. Some described her as a proto-feminist, but she also opposed the feminism of her day. She modernized the language of Jesus in her plays about Jesus and opposed using King James English, but she was also very conservative in their approach to orthodoxy. As Downing says, she conceived a baby when she was in her 30s in part because she did not believe that contraception was moral, but her sexual partner didn't believe sex without contraception was licit for them, and he abandoned her because of the baby. While she arranged for him to be raised in an orphanage run by her sister and attempted to adopt him, she did not even disclose his existence to her own parents (or him). She is credited for the rise of the classical school movement, but she opposed the type of nationalism that is increasingly associated with that classical school movement. I know enough about Sayers to know that virtually no modern reader would be comfortable with the range of her opinions, but that range seemed to be missing from the book. Sayers' ideas, as presented here, did not have any of the rough edges that I think are there, and in many ways, this lack of rough edges undercut the idea that Sayers was subversive.
There was also a lot of repetition and repeated themes that got boring. Downing was interested in showing how Sayers believed in "both/and" not just either/or. But there is only so much repetition of that idea before it feels contrived. That is even more the case for her presentation of the "economy of exchange." I can see how Sayers was concerned about how Christians attempt to negotiate with God and seek to follow God to acquire what they want from God. This is, in some ways, a prosperity gospel concept. And there is certainly a misuse of the idea of following God because of what good can come about because of it. But again, the sheer number of times it comes up makes me question whether ideas are being shoehorned into the book. (I searched using Google Books's search inside feature, and it says the phrase "economy of exchange" was used 46 times in the 142 pages available to be searched.)
I am still interested in reading more Sayers. I plan to read Mind of the Maker, the Zeal for thy House (play), and A Presumption of Death (the next Jill Patton Walsh book continuing the Wimsey series) by the end of the year.
I originally posted this on my blog at https://bookwi.se/subversive/
pinoncoffee's review
3.0
Sayers was one of my formative authors; I was so excited to read this book, but Downing made me grumpy. To be fair: she did research her subject and put it in historical context (which is good!) and there were interesting connections.
This book would have benefited from a good editor to help clear out repetition, poorly considered comparisons, and, just, unhelpful contemporary add-ons, including politically charged ideas that hurt her point more than it helped it. They didn’t serve Downing’s work. Downing tended to fall in love with a phrase and use it until it fell over (“both/and”).
There are gems in here, but most of them are Sayers herself, rather than what Downing made of her. Just go read Sayers.
This book would have benefited from a good editor to help clear out repetition, poorly considered comparisons, and, just, unhelpful contemporary add-ons, including politically charged ideas that hurt her point more than it helped it. They didn’t serve Downing’s work. Downing tended to fall in love with a phrase and use it until it fell over (“both/and”).
There are gems in here, but most of them are Sayers herself, rather than what Downing made of her. Just go read Sayers.
bookworm_baggins's review
4.0
I love Dorothy Sayers. She left an incredible legacy through her writing, one that is so relevant today. This was a thorough look at her numerous works, and I think it worked for me because I was so familiar with Sayers’s vast range of works - from Lord Peter to The Man Born to be King to her theological works. Hands down 5 stars for chapter five: The Politics of Religion, the Religion of Politics. This read more like an academic book most of the time, often repetitive to a fault, but I still came away with more of Sayers added to my list to read next. I also realized I prefer to read Sayers herself than read someone else talking about her.
holtfan's review
3.0
Subversive.
Two stars for the actual book. Adding another star because even with a somewhat mediocre presentation, the genius of Sayers shines through. And also because I'm feeling guilty about how much I want to trash this book.
The fundamental problem: Sayers's writing doesn't subvert Christianity. If anything, this book proves how firmly she upheld fundamental, traditional Christian doctrine.
To be fair, the book really aims for a message like: Christians in Sayers' day criticized her writings because they subverted cultural expectations about Christianity. The problem is, the only real example provided for this claim rests on Christians criticizing Sayers for "modernizing" Scripture in her radio broadcast and not just directly quoting the King's James version.
Now, if the book emphasized how much Sayers's avowal of traditional Christian doctrine subverted secular thought, I think it would hold up better. Christianity is a subversive religion. Sayers held to traditional Christianity. Ergo...But it doesn't. It just keeps hammering on the reactions of Christians of her day.
Downing also tries to draw conclusions about Sayers's writing and apply them to modern day Christians. These analogies feel a little heavy-handed. They aren't as bad as when she tries to illustrate one of Sayers's points with an example from her own life, though. I cringed every time she talked about her own life. It isn't that her reflections don't clarify or add to the argument. They just feel...subpar when compared to the depth of the point being made.
I liked the first few chapters of this book. I didn't know much about Sayers's plays or radio broadcasts and would never have thought to look to them for glimpses into Sayers's theology. Downing does a good job pulling out the richness of those texts.
But as the book went on, it increasingly lost me. In particular, her chapter on The Mind of the Maker disappointed me. Sayers's book by the same name is so rich and challenging and Downing fills that chapter with filler about C.S. Lewis and Tolkien.
I wouldn't totally throw this book out. Like I said, a chapter or two really struck me. And Sayers's theology and snark shines through despite the often lackluster presentation. But this book isn't equal to the challenge of illuminating the many ways Sayers's theology illuminates the truth of Christianity. And in major part, it is because the book insists on emphasizing Sayers's role in contrast to Christianity instead of working within Christianity.
Two stars for the actual book. Adding another star because even with a somewhat mediocre presentation, the genius of Sayers shines through. And also because I'm feeling guilty about how much I want to trash this book.
The fundamental problem: Sayers's writing doesn't subvert Christianity. If anything, this book proves how firmly she upheld fundamental, traditional Christian doctrine.
To be fair, the book really aims for a message like: Christians in Sayers' day criticized her writings because they subverted cultural expectations about Christianity. The problem is, the only real example provided for this claim rests on Christians criticizing Sayers for "modernizing" Scripture in her radio broadcast and not just directly quoting the King's James version.
Now, if the book emphasized how much Sayers's avowal of traditional Christian doctrine subverted secular thought, I think it would hold up better. Christianity is a subversive religion. Sayers held to traditional Christianity. Ergo...But it doesn't. It just keeps hammering on the reactions of Christians of her day.
Downing also tries to draw conclusions about Sayers's writing and apply them to modern day Christians. These analogies feel a little heavy-handed. They aren't as bad as when she tries to illustrate one of Sayers's points with an example from her own life, though. I cringed every time she talked about her own life. It isn't that her reflections don't clarify or add to the argument. They just feel...subpar when compared to the depth of the point being made.
I liked the first few chapters of this book. I didn't know much about Sayers's plays or radio broadcasts and would never have thought to look to them for glimpses into Sayers's theology. Downing does a good job pulling out the richness of those texts.
But as the book went on, it increasingly lost me. In particular, her chapter on The Mind of the Maker disappointed me. Sayers's book by the same name is so rich and challenging and Downing fills that chapter with filler about C.S. Lewis and Tolkien.
I wouldn't totally throw this book out. Like I said, a chapter or two really struck me. And Sayers's theology and snark shines through despite the often lackluster presentation. But this book isn't equal to the challenge of illuminating the many ways Sayers's theology illuminates the truth of Christianity. And in major part, it is because the book insists on emphasizing Sayers's role in contrast to Christianity instead of working within Christianity.
More...