<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Outside of a Dog: Sayers, Dorothy L.: (01) Whose Body?</title>
<link>http://www.steelypips.org/weblog/2004/02/sayers_dorothy_3.php</link>
<description>Comments on Sayers, Dorothy L.: (01) Whose Body?</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:43:31 -0500</lastBuildDate>
<generator>http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.36</generator>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

<item>
<title>Pam</title>
<description>Pam wrote on February 23, 2004 at 12:05 PM: &lt;p&gt;Surely if anybody's a Mary Sue in the Wimsey stories, it's Harriet Vane?&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; (I'm not saying she is one, just that if any of the characters is an idealized auctorial stand-in, it's Vane.)&lt;/p&gt;</description>
<link>http://www.steelypips.org/weblog/2004/02/sayers_dorothy_3.php#c3900</link>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kate</title>
<description>Kate wrote on February 23, 2004 at 10:58 PM: &lt;p&gt;No kidding--she's a _mystery_ _novelist_, for goodness' sake. That's a side reason that the accusations of Mary Sue-dom against Peter annoy me: attempting to shoehorn Peter into the category, when there's a much more obvious candidate available, seems more like a vendetta than reasoned critique (and now I'm exaggerating for effect, but you know what I mean). &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; I don't think Harriet is a Mary Sue either, but I could make a heck of a lot better case for her than for Peter.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
<link>http://www.steelypips.org/weblog/2004/02/sayers_dorothy_3.php#c3901</link>
</item>


</channel>
</rss>