You needn’t be a series-long admirer of Isabel Dalhousie to be beguiled by this curious philosopher and casual sleuth. In this eighth installment—with the ruminating Edinburgh heroine steeped in devoted motherhood, impending marriage, and office and family intrigue—it might even help to be a stranger to her more daring exploits; here, No. 1 Ladies’ Detectives Agency series phenom McCall Smith has his quirky gumshoe stalking moral intrigue more doggedly than mystery. It’s Isabel’s mission to help a visiting Australian philosopher find her father after her adoptive parents and birth mother die. The task is deceptively easy and never comes close to matching the confounding mysteries of Isabel’s niece’s fickle heart, the wisdom of ratting her out to health officials for a batch of toxic mushrooms, the impermanence of the greatest love of her life, or how to raise her adorable toddler with fiancé Jamie. Isabel believes only the examined life is worth living, and fearlessly so: “she would never accept things as they were. That was what made her do what she did—practice philosophy—and what made her... do battle for understanding, for sympathy, for love; in small ways... that cumulatively made a difference.” It makes Isabel a heroine worth following, even through this more quiet, reflective foray. (Dec.)
From the Publisher
“Entertaining and enchanting reading about characters you think you know—and wish you did.” —Las Vegas Review Journal
“Dalhousie [is] back in true form. . . . An endearing, intelligent and kindly character.” —The Charleston Post & Courier
“Readers get to soak up the cozy atmosphere of this Scottish university town and McCall Smith’s gentle good will.” —The Boston Globe
“A real treat.” —The Plain Dealer
“Subtle, surprising, and incisive.” —Sacramento Book Review
"You don't read these books to find out 'who done it,' you read them for the pleasure of spending a few hours following a sensitive, intellectual woman as she roams around Edinburgh speculating ingeniously about everything from moral responsibility to aesthetics and metaphysics." —BlogCritics
“McCall Smith’s latest novel featuring the wise but impish Edinburgh philosopher Isabel Dalhousie. . . . [And] countless small adventures and gentle observations.” —The Toronto Star
“Totally absorbing. . . . Isabel is everything you’d want in a philosopher, but she is also quirky and witty.” —Booklist (starred review)
“You needn’t be a series-long admirer of Isabel Dalhousie to be beguiled by this curious philosopher and casual sleuth. . . . A heroine worth following.” —Publishers Weekly
“McCall Smith’s talent for dialogue is matched only by his gift for characterization. It’s hard to believe that he could make up a character as complex and unique as Isabel. She is by turns fearless, vulnerable, headstrong, and insecure, but always delightful.” —Chicago Tribune
“Endearing. . . . Offers tantalizing glimpses of Edinburgh’s complex character and a nice, long look into the beautiful mind of a thinking woman.” —The New York Times Book Review
“In Mma Ramotswe, [McCall Smith] minted one of the most memorable heroines in any modern fiction. Now, with the creation of Isabel Dalhousie, he’s done it again. . . . She’s such good company, it’s hard to believe she’s fictional. You finish [one] installment greedily looking forward to more.” —Newsweek
“Isabel is a force to be reckoned with.”—USA Today
Read an Excerpt
Isabel Dalhousie, a philosopher, lowered her copy of the Scotsman newspaper and smiled. On the other side of the breakfast table, buttering a slice of bread for their young son, Charlie, who was now two and a half, and hungry, was her lover and fiancé, Jamie. She loved them both so much, so much. They were her world—a tousle-headed little boy and a bassoonist; more important to her than anything else—more than the complete works of Kant and Aristotle, more than the city she lived in, more than Scotland itself.
“Something amusing?” Jamie asked.
There was normally little to laugh at in the papers. Political scandals, economic disaster, suffering in all its familiar forms—these were the daily staple of a disaster-prone, uneasy planet. Add to that the seeming inability of the Scottish rugby team to defend itself against the predations of a group of hefty New Zealanders on a summer tour, and the newspaper’s offering for that day was bleak.
Isabel had read out to Jamie the opening paragraph of the rugby report, in which the Scottish side’s performance had been described in less than glowing terms. Jamie, however, had listened with only half an ear; he liked tennis and golf, and found that games involving a ball any larger than those used in these two games held little attraction for him. For her part, although she did not follow sport at all closely, Isabel enjoyed reading about rugby, a game that struck her as being one of the few remaining tribal rituals on offer to males in modern societies. An anthropologist might have a field-day in pursuing this interpretation; might note with some interest the famous rugby haka of the New Zealanders, as their players lined up and challenged the other team with thumbed noses and intimidating grunts; might listen to the Scottish supporters singing “Flower of Scotland,” with its fourteenth-century military references (fourteenth century!); might remark upon the wailing bagpipes at the beginning of the game and the painted faces and . . .
And there was another, more personal reason for her interest: as a schoolgirl she had been in love, at a safe distance, with a boy who had seemed impossibly handsome, even when covered in mud and in a heaving scrummage. Some men were like that, she mused: they were much improved by mud.
But it was not the rugby news that made her laugh; it was a small item in the paper’s political diary.
“Very amusing,” she said to Jamie. “There’s a story here about a Glasgow politician who held a surgery. You know those consultation sessions they hold—they call them surgeries; constituents can drop in and tackle them about local problems.”
Jamie nodded. “I went to see my local Member of Parliament once. He was actually very helpful.”
“Yes. That’s what an MP’s surgery is for. But this one apparently had a constituent coming in to complain about a sore nose. Can you believe it? A sore nose.”
Jamie smiled. “Well, I suppose if you call it a surgery . . .”
“Yes,” said Isabel. “But surely people understand that it’s a politician they’re seeing—not a doctor.” She paused. “Or are there people who really think that their Member of Parliament should be able to do something about their aches and pains?”
She thought there were; once the state in its benignity embraced us, then the routes by which it dispensed its succour could easily be confused.
She picked up the newspaper. “People are pretty strange, aren’t they? They can be so . . . well, I suppose there’s no other word for it but misinformed.”
“Yes,” said Jamie. “They can. I was reading somewhere or other about a woman who wrote to an advice column asking whether a baby adopted from Korea would speak Korean when he grew up, even if raised elsewhere.”
“She’s not alone,” said Isabel. “Natural language. Scottish kings have believed in that—James IV, I think, even conducted an experiment. He had a couple of children taken off to Inchkeith Island and looked after by a nurse who was dumb. He wanted to find out what language children would speak naturally if they weren’t exposed to English—or, rather, to Scots. He thought it would be Hebrew.”
“And it turned out to be Korean?”
Isabel smiled. “It was nothing, I imagine. Just sounds. Or, as Walter Scott suggested, they might have sounded like birds. There are lots of birds on Inchkeith Island.”
Jamie wondered whether the children might have invented a language.
“Not from scratch,” said Isabel. “Or only a rudimentary one.”
Jamie passed a piece of buttered bread to Charlie, who seized it, examining it intently before putting it into his mouth.
“Rudimentary? So they’d have no grammar—just nouns for the various objects? Not that they’d need many. The sea. Birds’eggs. Food. Fish.”
“Yes,” said Isabel. “And a word for Scotland too, perhaps.They’d look across the firth and see the mainland, and they might give it a name.”
He shook his head. “I find that story rather sad,” he said.
Isabel put the newspaper down on the table. She thought about the children on the island, imagining them huddled together in the winter, with no words to describe their misery. A familiar question occurred to her: if you had no language, then what form did your thoughts take—if you thought at all? Of course you thought—she had never had any difficulty with accepting that—but how limited would your thoughts be in the absence of any words to express them?
She looked at Charlie and smiled. He returned the smile. He had no words for what had just passed between them, she told herself; they had engaged with one another, and affection and amusement, tinged with a note of conspiracy, had been in the mind of each. These were feelings, though; not articulated intentions or thoughts as such. Or had Charlie thought, She’s smiling at me, even if he as yet had no word for smile? It was, she decided, rather like looking at an unfamiliar stretch of landscape; one might not know its name but one could still be said to know it, and knowledge of the geographical name would make no difference to how one thought about what one saw. And people still felt hungry, even if they had no name for hunger.
Jamie reached for the newspaper, found the diary item and read it. Then he looked up. “But he’s a doctor,” he said.
He pointed to the column in the newspaper. “Him. The Member of Parliament who was asked about the sore nose. He’s a doctor. I’ve seen him on television. He’s the health spokesman for his party.”
“So that constituent who asked about his nose wasn’t so stupid after all.”
Isabel made an apologetic gesture. “I suppose I jumped to a conclusion,” she said. “But so did the newspaper. Mea culpa, or rather, nostra culpa.”
Jamie looked at her with mock disapproval. “Maybe we shouldn’t judge others too quickly.” He tried to make it sound as if he was joking, but the comment came across as censorious.
“All right,” she said. “It’s very easy to get things wrong when we aren’t in possession of all the facts.”
“And I suspect that we hardly ever know everything we should,” said Jamie.
He might as well admit to a serious point: he wanted her to think about it; he wanted Isabel to be less certain; he wanted her to know that there were times when she might not be right.
But she was not thinking chastening thoughts: Isabel was a philosopher and she could not help but follow a challenging train of thought once it had been mooted. Jamie had suggested that we had to make do with imperfect knowledge, and he was right, she thought. Yet not knowing everything might be preferable to having all the facts set out before one. For example, did any of us really want to know the exact day, the hour even, when we were to die? She considered not. Nor did we necessarily want to know what would happen after we were gone.
That, of course, raised a whole range of issues about confidence and belief. Civilisations arose because people believed in them and in the values they represented. People built cathedrals and palaces, painted masterpieces—or paid other people to paint them—because they felt that what they were doing would last. If they thought that everything was just for next year, then they would hardly bother. It would be rather like living in a campsite, or like being a passing tenant of a patch of earth. So when a lover said, “I want to be with you always,” he had to mean it, even if he knew that it could not be true.
Charlie had finished with the piece of bread Jamie had fed him and was now waving his arms in the air—his signal for more.
“I adore the way he does that,” said Isabel. “Imagine if one could go through life waving one’s arms in the air whenever one wanted something.”
“Some do,” said Jamie. “Conductors, in particular. They wave their arms at you if they want you to play with more expression.”
He remembered something that made him smile. “And sometimes they forget that they’re not in the concert hall. I saw Giorgio—remember the conductor I introduced you to last year? Well, I once saw him buying pistachio nuts at a delicatessen in Glasgow. The assistant was measuring them out and he urged her to put in more by waving his arms in just the same way as he gets us to play fortissimo. I imagine he had no idea he was doing it.”
Isabel took over the feeding of Charlie, glancing at her watch as she did so.
“Time,” she said.
It could have been a comment on the matters she had been pondering—on permanence and our sense of the future—but it was more prosaic than that.
“Yes,” sighed Jamie. “I know. I must go.”
He had a rehearsal that morning in Glasgow and would have to catch the train from Haymarket Station in an hour or so. The journey was so familiar, a meandering ride across the waistbelt of Scotland, the hills of Stirlingshire off to the right, gentle, soft; past small towns in which nothing happened; past the grey barracks of Glasgow’s outskirts, and culminating in the echoing halls of Queen Street Station: a trip that lasted not much more than forty-five minutes, but which took one out of one culture and into another; from a clear Eastern light to a diffuse Western glow; from cold to warmth, some might say.
He now rose from the table, planted a kiss on Charlie’s forehead and went off to get ready.
Isabel prepared another piece of buttered bread for Charlie, this time spreading it with a thin layer of Marmite. Charlie was an unusual child, at least in his taste for savoury foods. His first word had been “olive,” and this had presaged a taste for anchovy paste and horseradish sauce, even for mild curries. His contemporaries from the playgroup he now attended each morning would not have understood; they had eyes only for brightly iced cupcakes and they would have spat out the pickled gherkins to be found neatly packed in Charlie’s plastic lunch box. Isabel called the lunch box a tiffin box, a word she had picked up from her paternal grandfather, who had been in India. She had been five when he died, and her memory of him was hazy. In fact, all that she remembered was his moustache, which was an elaborate salt-and-pepper affair, and the ancient brass-bound tiffin box that sat on a table in his hall.
“Tiffin,” Charlie suddenly announced. “Charlie want tiffin now.”
Isabel gave him the piece of bread, which he examined briefly before throwing on the floor.
“Tiffin,” he said.
Isabel picked up the bread. “Don’t throw food, Charlie. That’s not nice.”
Moral philosophy for two-year-olds, she thought. Don’t throw food. It was as good a starting point as any to begin the teaching of responsibility towards the world around us. And it was helpful to back it up with some justification too: that’s not nice. Again, a simple expression said it all. Philosophers might tie themselves in knots over the question of conduct that was morally wrong—that debate, after all, was what Isabel’s job was about—but perhaps the ultimate answer was so much simpler: that’s not nice. Did one have to go further than that? She sighed. Of course one did; morality was not about what you liked or disliked; it had to be justified, to have some reasoning behind it.
“Tiffin is for later,” she said. “You can have tiffin at playgroup.”
“Tiffin now,” said Charlie.
“No,” she said. “Tiffin comes later—at tiffin-time, darling. Eleven-thirty.”
She reflected on this short exchange. Charlie had given voice to a desire: he wanted tiffin now. She had refused him—tiffin came with conditions: it could be enjoyed only at a certain time. Charlie might well think: why? If one can eat tiffin at eleven-thirty, one can surely eat it now. It was an arbitrary rule perhaps, but it offered a more general lesson besides: that we cannot always have what we want. The age of two and a half, Isabel thought, was as good a time as any to learn this most difficult and disappointing of lessons about life.
But there could at least be an explanation, although she doubted whether an explanation was what a child would want.
“Tiffin is for later, you see, darling. Tiffin is for when you’re hungry. See?”
“Hungry now,” said Charlie.