I didn't think the beginning to be slow as many of my fellow readers thought and I was not so hard on our narrator as well. Maybe that was because she is so young and not very decisive, some flaw of the character that I can still detect in myself. A weak character always leaves for improvement. And emotions are stirred with such a character whom one always wants to grab by the shoulders and make see/act.With the second half though, I always thought I knew what was going on but - way of the mark - it came different throughout the book. I won't give away anything. Du Maurier is a remarkable narrator and I think the best recommendation I can give is to grab the book and start reading immedietly if you havent't done so yet.
One question remained in my head until the end: Why doesn't the narrator have a name? I searched the internet and of course somebody cared to ask du Maurier herself. She replied that she could not think of a name and that it even became a challenge for her to write the novel without naming the narrator. Of course not naming her hints on her not being worthy to have a name. Rebecca then is not only the more beautiful, witty and capable character but although the one deserving to have a name.
I won't go as far as to count it one of my favorites but one should certainly not miss it.
This readalong was hosted by Allie at A Literary Odyssey
I agree with what you've said here about never learning the narrator's name. It seems to fit the narrator's initial tentative nature that the book is named after the woman who seems to haunt her very happiness.
ReplyDeleteI always thought that the fact that the narrator's name isn't given was another reflection of her always being in Rebecca's shadow, even the one name she is given (Mrs De Winter) being second-hand. I love this book!
ReplyDelete'Rebecca' ranks pretty highly with me too, but not quite at the top. I was often wondering about the narrator too. It was the first I've read from Du Maurier and will not be my last.
ReplyDelete