Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Thoughts on "Rebecca" by Daphne du Maurier
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 бер 2022
- Come join me in my new library to discuss the classic and creepy tale of "Rebecca". Published in 1938, the language of this book was surprisingly easy and beautiful. I loved it and I was horrified by it. What are your thoughts?
Forgot to mention I wore this flower crown because of all the extensive mentions of flowers in this book!
Support me!
Venmo: Saoirse-Ibarguen
Follow me!
Instagram: lovealwayssaoirse
Bookstagram: saoirsesshelf
Catstagram: springerandkatahdin
Blog: saoirsei.wordp...
Articles I've written:
thetrek.co/aut...
shewalksthewal...
Buy the books I'm published in:
Epoch Press: epochpress.org...
From Arthur's Seat: fromarthurssea...
it's very interesting to me how this book is marketed as a romance when it's probably the least romantic thing i have ever read. and how rebecca is made out to be this villain, meanwhile maxim is the literal murderer who is shown throughout the whole book to treat his wife terribly. add to that the fact that every piece of information we get about rebecca is unreliable, and the narrator's uncanny willingness to hide the murder, and the ending becomes so so so eery and creepy. something something subversion, men get away with everything, a lot of readers lack critical thinking and reflection, etc etc
Daphne Du Maurier loved ambiguity. A lot of her stories leave you pondering, looking at a character one way and then another. My Cousin Rachel takes this to a further extreme, and so winds up the reader even after the ending.
she was invisible in her own story that even the author didn't bother to name her lol. LOVED this book and your review! I just finished this today!
My mind was absolutely blown upon realizing this, and I was devastated that it was not intentional. Don’t know if I’ll ever fully recover.
Referring to Maxim...well some people would just prefer a soft and benevolent male like Frank. Someone who would have forever coddled the narrator and never expected her to break out of her shyness, grow a backbone and become the character of strength she develops into in the end. He’d be happy to keep her a frightened rabbit who would live a dull and dramaless life. A man who, under the same scrutiny and circumstances of Maxim, would have folded like a rag doll and confessed everything. Of course, Maxim is not a flawless character, I didn’t like him at first either, but that’s what makes him interesting! And his use of manipulation is no more than the years of manipulation his first wife used upon him. The marriage of the narrator and Maxim is at first beneficial to both of them. For her, an escape from a life of very few options. For him, an escape from guilt and haunting memories. But it’s not until the truth is revealed, that their true feelings for each other can finally blossom. Also, all the criticism lodged against Maxim are all the same ones you could use to describe Jane Eyre’s Rochester, an archetypal Byronic hero. But I guess that type of hero is no longer considered a “modern man”.
For any of you who don't know Cornwall, it's the county furthest in the south-west of England and has an ancient Celtic past, like Wales or Ireland, and a very special atmosphere. There is less evidence of that past since Daphne's time, with sightseers and people coming to enjoy sheltered beaches and small resorts, however. The coast is wild, with waves pounding at the jagged rocks and cliffs and there are many old shipwrecks all around it that are mostly very hard to get to for any would-be treasure hunters. Daphne's writing was definitely captive to this ethereal 'presence' of historical past, it's haunted coast, and for me all her best books are those that are set right there. Jamaica Inn, for example, or in a more cheerful vein, Frenchman's Creek. Rebecca is to me, a kind of ghost story, in that this deceased woman persists in absolutely dominating the house itself, almost trying to dictate its future. My Cousin Rachel is another story in which a beautiful enigmatic woman takes control of the narrative. However, I highly recommend The King's General, set in the English Civil Wars of the C17th, in which she was inspired to use the very house she lived in. Built in 1600, it was discovered in the early C19th to have once had a secret staircase and a room, where human remains were found. It was written in the immediate aftermath of WW2, as she felt a parallel between the 1940s and the 1640s, and what women experienced during and after a time of terrible conflict.
I loved this book mainly because of the slow and somehow relaxing pace (the book was a bit scary tho). The heroin was a bit annoying but the ending killed me. Amazing.
Loved, loved, LOVED your review, as do I this book and Du Maurier herself! I’ve read this particular book of hers twice, quite a few of her other novels, and a biography. Her “House on the Strand” in particular was a very fun, and different, sort of read. SO, there was one quote that you mentioned at the beginning of your review that could be easily passed over as nicely descriptive but as you were reading it, it really stood out to me for the first time; and I think it says more about the story and its characters and deserves more notice than a quick pass over: “High up in the tumbled roof there was a window, narrow as a slit. It might have held a presence medieval; and, reaching to the desk for pencil and paper, I sketched in fancy with an absent mind a profile, pale and aquiline. A somber eye, a high-bridged nose, a scornful upper lip. And I added a pointed beard and lace at the throat, as the painter had done, long ago in a different time.” As you read this aloud, I thought of arrowslits in castle walls, and their purpose? To shoot at the enemy below while remaining safe within the confines of the castle. It’s also another example of how much the past plays into this story … starting with the opening sentence, “Last night I dreamt I went to Manderley again”.
Daphne never thought of her story as it had, and has been, advertised: “a tale of romantic suspense,” and it bothers me {too} that it has been hyped in this falsely, derogatory way. You also made mention of the narrator dreaming up scenes in her mind, similar to that of being in a play or theater production, which made me think of Daphne’s upbringing: both of her parents were well-known actors in the theater, so this would have been very familiar territory for her.
I was waiting for you to get to the window scene; you know, where Mrs. Danvers tries to talk Mrs. de Winter into ending her life. That part really shows the reader how demented and evil Danvers is and just what a thin line the narrator has been walking. And for the record, I had the very same reaction you did when she learns that Maxim is a murderer. In the words of Gandalf, “Run, you fool!” 😄
I thought the ambiguous and abrupt ending brilliant and so in sync with the rest of the story! My second time with the novel I listened to it on audio so had no idea I was that close to the ending. Consistent with the assortment of “shocks” throughout the book, this too then came as a SHOCK, which only seemed fitting. And yes, I think it’s safe to say that crazy-pants Danvers burned down Manderley. 😉
Btw, LOVE your window seat! It looks so cozy. You did a lovely job with it. I hope you enjoy many splendid hours sitting and reading books, watching birds, and delighting in some much-needed quiet time. 💜
Saoirse looks so pretty!
Immediately after reading the book I ran here to hear your thoughts. What an incredibly insightful video.
I honestly like Maxim-upon my first read I thought he was amazing, on my reread, I still think he’s awesome, but not so much because he’s charming as it is how real he is. (I mean, he’s still very handsome in my head, and get excited about the scenes with him), but my thoughts are definitely much different towards him upon rereading than my first time, at age 16.
Hey! Thanks for your great video on "Rebecca." I'm just about to go on a pilgrimage with some podcasters to do a deep dive on the book in Cornwall... traipsing around the areas where the book was written. Particularly loved the analogy you made between R & Jane Eyre but the heroine vs. the villainess. Good one! Yes, there are a lot of similarities. I loved that the whole book is just a very long & complex memory, like a trip into Dumbledore's pensieve. You are a lovely, well-spoken presenter & you make some excellent points. I'm following you now & I hope to find more books you've reviewed that are on my shelf too.
I enjoyed your review and found it very interesting that you had developed such strong feelings about the characters. I read it first in the mid 1970s and have re-read it multiple times (typical for me).
(In a sort of "OMG" turn of event the first reading was literally one sitting. I had gone to bed and just kept turning pages engrossed in the story. It was just getting light when I got to the balcony scene between Danvers and the narrator--and got up to open a window. The problem? We lived in a stone house from 1900, my bedroom was on the third floor above a stone terrace, and it was a foggy in the early summer dawn. YIKES!)
I've listened to a number of reviews and many talk of Manderley as a "character" in the book-- which I tend to agree with-- but which you only touched on indirectly. In the first chapter Du Maurier speaks of it "living and breathing" I mention it because, IMHO, none of the reviews define the house as the complete reflection of and an actual "alive" manifestation of the dead Rebecca. There are areas which she has not polluted--the rose garden, the library, tea under the chestnut tree. Areas that are semi-safe (the dining room--where her influence seems to be limited to the wasteful breakfast buffet), and then there are the areas associated with Rebecca.
Those areas seem to be beautiful, like Rebecca herself, but contain contradiction that give you a sense of something being not as it seems. The morning room looks out onto, and contains a profusion of the blood red rhododendron. There is a clearing with a statue of a faun. The coldly formal drawing room gives nothing away. The Happy Valley concludes too abruptly at a common, rough shingle beach, the cottage is decaying like a corpse, and the bedroom looks like a stage set, unreal, smells musty, and is filled with the melancholy sound of the sea.
I'd be interested in your opinion.
Love the window seat. One of my prize possessions is a small watercolor done by my great grandfather. They lived in Montreal and had a large summer cottage on a lake in the Laurentian Mountains. The living room was double height, with a balcony that ran across the front of the house. On the balcony was a large bay window with a window seat overlooking their wooded front acreage, with a view of the lake beyond. That is the view he painted, before any other homes could be seen. The perfect place for a book and a cup of tea.
I find it interesting how Rebecca mirrors daphne marriage and suicide
This was a fantastic audiobook!
i really enjoyed watching this video, thanks.
I had a strong dislike for Maxim. I doubt he loved anyone but himself. I know how the narrator feels when she creates scenarios in her head, I am guilty of this myself.. I watched a documentary about Daphne,and she herself experienced feelings of not being glamorous,or pretty enough for her husband. I loved the Hitchcock movie of this book. A "Gothic/Thriller' is how I would describe this story,the only romance is Mrs. Danvers "Love" for her mistress "Rebecca". She was obsessed with her.
(Alfred Hitchcock and) I believe Manderlay burns at the end. The passage you read is not very explicit, but there are also hints in chapter 1. There the narrator is telling the story years later and she says Manderlay is just a shell, and that "Manderlay was no more".
Here's Alfred's version of that scene near the end:
m.ua-cam.com/video/m1uvgx3NUR0/v-deo.html
…but don’t believe Alfred Hitchcock (and me). He didn’t even have the narrator in the car!
Thanks for all of your insights! Your videos are a joy.
Big spoilers in this text!!!
Hey, I really liked your review! I agree with a lot of the things you are saying, but when it comes to your description of Rebecca, I have to disagree. I think she is framed to be the villain. The narrator learns almost everything about Rebecca from Maxim, who is literally the one that murdered her. We can also see that he is very manipulative towards the narrator, so why would he have been different with Rebecca? He also has a lot of power over both of the women, because of his wealth and social position, and it´s almost like the narrator belongs to him, as her only name is Mrs. de Winter. I feel like he said all of these things about her to justify his murder, we only get his perspective as Rebecca can’t defend herself anymore. I also think that the narrator, who we naturally feel inclined to trust, is lying to herself when it comes to Maxim and Rebecca. She wants to be loved by him and she also dislikes Rebecca strongly as she is her „rival“. I personally think that a feminist analysis of this book makes it even more interesting. It shoes us what happens to women in the patriarchy and how their voices are being taken as well as their lives. (in an literal sense but also metaphorically, als Maxim does not only take Rebeccas life, but also the narrators life in a way)
English isn’t my first language, so I’m sorry if there are mistakes, but I hope I got my message across:))
Thank you for your great review!!!
Tysm, this helped me finish my essay 🥲
I understand that most of our information on Rebecca comes from Maxim, who can be considered an unreliable source as he is the one who kills her. However, we do get bits and pieces of information to tell us what Rebecca was like through other characters that can corroborate Maxim's description and re-telling of her.
We know that Mrs. Danvers is incredibly fond of Rebecca, but she does give away a few details of Rebecca's true character when she retells a few of the conversations she had with Rebecca. Even if Mrs. Danvers herself recounts these as fond memories, I did not find myself drawn to Rebecca during these retellings. Rebecca is definitely put up on a pedestal and Mrs. Danvers almost seemed blindly in love. Mrs. Danvers knew about Rebecca's affairs and selfish attitudes - doing whatever she pleased without any regard to other people's feelings, but still regarded her as a courageous and lovely woman.
Frank and Beatrice both seemed to refrain from speaking about Rebecca. We can assume this is because they are saddened about her death, or we can admit that they probably do not like her very much. Beatrice and Frank's attitudes towards the second Mrs. De Winter solidified to me that they much preferred her over Rebecca, and likely for good reasons.
Favell was a character that was unlikeable from the very start with our description from the narrator. Keep in mind that the narrator does not have a good impression of Favell right off the bat before we know any details about his relations to Rebecca and what other characters think of him. To find out that this is Rebecca's lover is quite telling of the type of person Rebecca was. We choose the people we love and spend our time with, the fact that Rebecca chose this man out of all of the people she could have had (ahem, her husband, or literally anyone else) is a reflection of her character. Your friends and lovers can serve as a mirror that reflects your personality, values, and priorities. If Favell is a reflection of Rebecca, I think we can all agree that she wasn't a great person.
I am not saying that Maxim was the ultimate husband or role-model male character. We do see Maxim treat the second Mrs. De Winter as a child, but nearly everyone else does too - Beatrice, Mrs. Van Hopper, Mrs. Danvers etc. She is a child in comparison to them - she is young, naïve and insecure and we see her go through the events at Manderley through this lens. She is figuring out her way and role in the world and her own identity throughout the book, however frustrating it might have been for the reader at times. From the beginning she does not feel as though she belongs in the world at Manderley, she casts herself in Rebecca's shadow by obsessing over her beauty, responsibilities and skills. The narrator also lets her insecurities and impulsive thoughts run wild throughout the book, really showing her immaturity in her relationships and in herself. I didn't see it as manipulation by Maxim, I thought she was just a young girl who married her first love and needed to grow up and find confidence in herself in the process.
I enjoyed your discussion of Rebecca here (one of my favorite books by Ms. du Maurier) and I particularly like how you compared Rebecca to Jane Eyre. Nice work (and I, too, disliked Maxim and admired Frank).
Beautiful windowseat
Yesss I really hate Maxim he´s horrible
omg thank youuuu. i hate the fact that everybody's trying to paint him as a traumatized baby
Ya... he is very very manipulative
So much is left for the reader to speculate... i was doubtful if the narrator had a personality disorder and also fear of abandonment
Yeah she burned down manderly