Talk:Rebecca (novel)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class. | ||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Was Rebecca really evil?
When I read the book the introduction suggested that Rebecca wasn't so much evil, as misunderstood and that she simply belonged to a more carefree set than Max. We only see Rebecca through other peoples eyes, predominantly Max's eyes (Ok also through Mrs Danvers eyes, but the second Mrs De Winter doesn't like her, and she seems to be mad so we can ignore her point of view!). Because Max hated her, we are led to think that she was bad. Yet it is clearly stated that she had a knack for getting people to love her. This is told in such a way that we think of Rebecca as a manipulative person tricking foolish and simple people into liking her so that she can walk all over them. But was that the case? Or was she genuinely nice? I think this is a case of the unreliable narrator. Because of her affairs Rebecca's husband and his family hated her (fair enough) but that may not be her whole story. I think it would be nice to have some discussion of this issue in the article. ChristineD 00:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
The "unreliable narrator" idea can be taken even further. It's possible that Maxim is deliberately lying about Rebecca's "evil nature", and that the Narrator believes him because of her dependent nature and obsessive hatred of Rebecca. It is certainly implied that the coroner is class-conscious and biased in Maxim's favor. The novel is a double mystery, the solved one of her death and the unacknowledged one of her true character. CharlesTheBold CharlesTheBold
- No one ever claims Rebecca was evil, simply she was uncaring. She didn't care about anyone but herself. This is amptly backed up by Mrs Danvers who was even with her as a child. Mrs Danvers shocks Jack, Rebecca's first cousin and lover by saying "She never loved you, she never loved any man, she was above all that." Then Danvers goes on to describ Rebecca as simply a woman who loved excitment and put herself first regardless of who it may have hurt
4.142.45.72 (talk) 01:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)Eric
[edit] Plot summary
Is there any reason that this has been removed? --Cherry blossom tree 21:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] trivia
I've reworded the section as impact on culture and removed some obscure references which were incomprehensible.
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca.jpg
Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca first.jpg
Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca first.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mrs de Winter
I've just finished reading Rebecca sequel by Susan Hill, written in the 1980s.
I find it both well written and well translated (I'm French).
It could be a good idea to write about this follow-up inside wikipedia but my own English is too poor to do that.
At present, I'm just begging the information to know whether the following fact is a contradiction in the original edition or just a mistake in my own language traduction.
-
- In Part I of Mrs de Winter, a text signed by Rebecca is discovered and destroyed soon afterwards... In part three, chapter 21, this same text
La carte était décolorée mais ressemblait à une flamme dans sa main.
- Tu l'as laissée dans la penderie, dit-il.
-
- is shown by Maxim at his new wife ! ! ! ? ? ? 82.224.88.52 09:45, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Place of writing?
I don't think the novel was written in Cyprus; in the afterword by Sally Beauwman in the 2002 edition it says that du Maurier wrote much of the book in Alexandria (Egypt), where her husband was posted at the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.77.115.34 (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- That's not what the hotel claims, but then they may be overplaying their role. If you can find a better source then by all means adjust it. Pyrope 19:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I didn't say that's what the hotel claims. In the article it says, "Much of the novel was written while she was staying at the Forest Park Hotel in Plátres, Cyprus. [3]" which is just plain wrong. She did stay in Cyprus for a holiday once, but most of Rebecca was thought up and written in Alexandria, as Sally Beauman says: "She was pregnant with her second child when at the planning stage of the book, and, by the time she actually began writing, at the age of thirty, she was in Egypt, where her husband, Frederick Browning, an officer with the Grenadier Guards, had been posted with his battalion. What many would regard as the quintessential Cornish novel was therefore begun, and much of it written, not in Cornwall, not even in England, but in the fierce heat of an Egyptian summer, in a city du Maurier came to loathe: Alexandria." (Afterword by Sally Beauman to "Rebecca", 2006 ed, ISBN 1 84408 038 2) Katie1971 (talk) 09:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- You need to include the reference in the section of the main article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- You are confusing "truth" with "verifiability", see WP:V. When I originally added the Platres claim the hotel publicity having made mention of the novel being at least partly written there. As she stayed there in 1936, for four weeks, it is reasonable to assume that at least some of the book was written on Cyprus. To say that the comment was "plain wrong" is stretching your source, as Beauman also only claims that "much" of the book was written in Egypt. The point I was making in my earlier comment is that the only verifiable source I had to hand was the website. You have a better source available and so the information has been updated. That is how Wikipedia works. Pyrope 14:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, but how do I do that? I am new here. Katie1971 (talk) 12:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Added like so - please check I got the details right. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca first.jpg
Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca first.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 21:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca.jpg
Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 21:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
