Susan Hill: Mrs de Winter

[dele]

anyone else read this book? It's the sequel to Daphne du Maurier's Rebecca, one of my favourite stories.

I was thouroughly disappointed with the novel, and was just wondering what any other people might have though about it.

 

[Freya]

Vaguely related, read Rebeccas Tale by someone that I cant remember, after I read Rebecca. I think I was disappointed - shall return in the morrow with something more constructive!

 

[dele]

I'll give it a read as soon as I can find a copy of it. I don't think the story could get destroyed anymore than Susan Hill already did it.

 

[Freya]

Just read a couple of Amazon reviews of it, seems they didn't think much of it either. The first one gave me a few chuckles I don't think I'll check it out, they make it sound pointless and quite grim.

I quite enjoyed Rebecca so when happened across Rebecca's Tale (Sally Beauman) in Waterstones I bought it immediately. It's written in quite a different style (understandably as it's by a totally different author, but sometimes these things shock you ) It's split into four sections. Colonel Julyan begins the investigation into Rebecca’s death, twenty years after the event (if I recall he was about to expire, and decided to resolve the mystery once and for all or something…) Enter Terence Grey, a historian who’s up from down South. The Colonel doesn’t appear to like him much (at first anyway) and I think he puts Grey through a few ‘tests’ before he tells him anything of importance. Anyway, they do their bit, and then it swaps to Greys perspective for the second section, and you learn a bit more about the mystery. For the third section. Beauman skips back twenty years and writes from Rebecca’s perspective. That was the bit I was worried about, I felt Beauman was taking a few liberties there – how could she possibly write as Rebecca? Didn’t quite trust her not to balls it up. Anyway, then last section is back in 1950s and written by Ellie, Colonel Julyans daughter.

Basically, I bought it with little thought (as I do most books) and when I got round to beginning it I was pretty convinced I was going to be very annoyed by the end. It turned out to be an OK read, but maybe a bit of an anti-climax. I’d kind of recommend it, but not if you’re after more of Rebecca. If that makes sense.

 

[dele]

On second thought, maybe I'll pass on that one. lol

 

[Freya]

May be as wise If you loved Rebecca you're probably not ready to deal with Rebecca's Tale.

 

[dele]

Why do some people feel the need to destroy perfectly good stories. And especially ones that they didn't create.

Same statement applies to all those authors who write "modern" fairy tales that kill all the magic. Erg!

 

[Freya]

Well I doubt anyone set out to 'destroy' it, they were probably just so captivated by the original story that they wanted to expand on it. But sequels by people other than the original author tend to suck

 

[Bird54]

I read it, and I was very disappointed. I don't know why people try to write sequels. Just look at the sequal to Gone With The Wind, it turned out not to be a book about the South, but just another romance novel. I was really, really disappointed.

 

[dele]

Sequels should be forbidden. Anyone who tries to write a sequel to a book that isn't theirs should be bound in chains and forced to do hard labour until they come to their senses.

The same goes with Disney sequels. *shudders*

 

[persian85033]

I didn't like the sequel to Gone with the Wind because Scarlett did not get what she deserved. It turned out that she was a very generous person and a mother. Ha.

 

[ladyjune98]

I have issues with sequels too. They're usually great when they're by the same author, but when someone else steps in . . . it's the worst when they try to be the author they're imitating. I remember a particularly horrible book, Excessively Diverted, that was supposed to be a sequel to Pride and Prejudice. I shudder to remember what the author did to the poor characters and the spirit of Jane Austen.