I added Ring for Jeeves to the list of books read, but I haven’t posted any sort of review yet. I’ve been holding off partly because of WOW (see previous post) but also because I just can’t think of much good to say about it. It’s really the first bad PG Wodehouse book I’ve read, and it took me a while to come to a conclusion about why that is. At first glance, it seems all the elements are there. The book has an old English country house, foolish peers, beautiful girls, romantic entanglements, and the uber-butler Jeeves to sort out everyone’s problems. But as one reads along, things don’t seem right. Everything is just… off. And it finally dawned on me that it was because the book was set in the 1950’s instead of the 1920’s or 30’s. You wouldn’t think that would make such a difference, but it does. I don’t know what it is about the decade that has such an impact, but it is important.

In sum, as I said, this is the only book of Wodehouse’s that I would say is actually bad, as opposed to simply fair or not up to his usual high standard. The hardcore fan will want to read it anyway simply because it is Wodehouse and because it has the novelty of being the only book with Jeeves but without Wooster.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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