This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
2petertemplar
Are you asking if she's a trashy romance novelist?
3LesMiserables
> 2
I'm asking is she renowned for romance or suspense or other...?
I'm asking is she renowned for romance or suspense or other...?
4petertemplar
Well, Rebecca defined her and that's gothic. She never wrote any mysteries as far as a I know. Jamaica Inn is another wonderful gothic novel.
Don't Look Now (the story collection) reminds me a lot of Patricia Highsmith. Nasty, disturbing little horror stories.
I loved The House on the Strand which is a strange mix of scifi and gothic(?).
Her heyday was before my time but I get the impression that she wasn't considered a "serious" writer then because she sold too many damn books. But I think her reputation has grown recently (just a gut feeling).
Don't Look Now (the story collection) reminds me a lot of Patricia Highsmith. Nasty, disturbing little horror stories.
I loved The House on the Strand which is a strange mix of scifi and gothic(?).
Her heyday was before my time but I get the impression that she wasn't considered a "serious" writer then because she sold too many damn books. But I think her reputation has grown recently (just a gut feeling).
5beatlemoon
I think she's rather known for both types of story; it just depends which one of her books you're reading. But she's definitely not Mills & Boon and not quite straight up mystery like Agatha Christie.
I just discovered Du Maurier last year and have so far read Rebecca, Frenchman's Creek, and My Cousin Rachel. Rebecca and Rachel were both focused more on the suspense, with a gothic feel. Frenchman's Creek was primarily a romance, but I wouldn't call it a genre romance. No heaving bosoms or wild euphemisms of men's private parts. I'd say it's a romance in the same sense that Jane Eyre is a romance.
Personally, I am loving her style and will likely wind up reading everything she's written!
(Edited to try and fix touchstones. They don't seem to be working - oh look, they're fixed!)
I just discovered Du Maurier last year and have so far read Rebecca, Frenchman's Creek, and My Cousin Rachel. Rebecca and Rachel were both focused more on the suspense, with a gothic feel. Frenchman's Creek was primarily a romance, but I wouldn't call it a genre romance. No heaving bosoms or wild euphemisms of men's private parts. I'd say it's a romance in the same sense that Jane Eyre is a romance.
Personally, I am loving her style and will likely wind up reading everything she's written!
(Edited to try and fix touchstones. They don't seem to be working - oh look, they're fixed!)
6Willoyd
Daphne du Maurier features very highly amongst favourite authors on another book reading forum that I subscribe to, and whilst a lot of purely popular writers are read (but no Mills and Boon or similar!), she mixes it amongst the 'classic' authors. I've not read her yet, but there are plenty whose opinion I respect who rate her highly.
7acidneutral
I find Du Maurier hard to tie down to one genre. "Frenchman's Creek" has many romantic elements and is probably the closest to a romance novel that I can think of. Some of her more obscure works, like "The Glass Blowers" are more in the historical fiction genre. I enjoy her style, very reminiscent of Bronte on some levels. Her eye for creating atmosphere is superb.
8overthemoon
I have a whole set of Du Maurier novels and love them all, except perhaps The King's General (I can't remember anything about it, to tell the truth). The Scapegoat, the Glassblowers, the House on the Strand, all very different and very readable. Nothing Mills and Boonsy about them, and I wouldn't compare her with Agatha Christie.
9Django6924
>8 overthemoon:
The Scapegoat is quite an interesting book. Have you ever thought of comparing it to The Talented Mr. Ripley? I'd have to reread the Highsmith book, but I think I actually prefer the Du Maurier treatment of the subject.
The Scapegoat is quite an interesting book. Have you ever thought of comparing it to The Talented Mr. Ripley? I'd have to reread the Highsmith book, but I think I actually prefer the Du Maurier treatment of the subject.
10maisonvivante
At her best, du Maurier is the perfect mixture of 20th century popular fiction and more serious so-called "literary" fiction. As someone suggested, the novel "Frenchman's Creek" is perhaps the one that comes closest to being genre fiction, and even that is of superior quality for a romance.
I've read all her novels and found value in each and every one. "The Scapegoat" was perhaps the most surprising and satisfying find. The story of a man who runs into his double and switches places with him, "The Scapegoat" is a rich character study. Like many of her other novels, du Maurier's use of a first person male protagonist is spot on. Few novelists are as adept as utilizing both gender voices as du Maurier is.
Her last novel is called "Rule Brittania," and while critically dismissed upon publication, I found it to be an intriguing, witty piece of speculative fiction done in tongue-in-cheek style. The story of how one village reacts when Britain is occupied by American soldiers, the novel is worth reading and probably would have been taken more seriously if a male author had written it.
"The Flight of the Falcon" is another novel I found very interesting, if mostly for its ability to sustain a sense of gothic doom within a very slow moving narrative. The characters are so rich and complex that the lack of plot becomes irrelevant.
I found worthwhile elements in all of du Maurier's novels, with "The Parasites" being my least favorite. Her stories are also well worth reading, and many of them have attained the level of classics of the macabre. Folio's matching du Maurier set shows some of her more popular books, and while I enjoyed them immensely, the more experimental narratives and subjects tend to be in her lesser known novels.
I've read all her novels and found value in each and every one. "The Scapegoat" was perhaps the most surprising and satisfying find. The story of a man who runs into his double and switches places with him, "The Scapegoat" is a rich character study. Like many of her other novels, du Maurier's use of a first person male protagonist is spot on. Few novelists are as adept as utilizing both gender voices as du Maurier is.
Her last novel is called "Rule Brittania," and while critically dismissed upon publication, I found it to be an intriguing, witty piece of speculative fiction done in tongue-in-cheek style. The story of how one village reacts when Britain is occupied by American soldiers, the novel is worth reading and probably would have been taken more seriously if a male author had written it.
"The Flight of the Falcon" is another novel I found very interesting, if mostly for its ability to sustain a sense of gothic doom within a very slow moving narrative. The characters are so rich and complex that the lack of plot becomes irrelevant.
I found worthwhile elements in all of du Maurier's novels, with "The Parasites" being my least favorite. Her stories are also well worth reading, and many of them have attained the level of classics of the macabre. Folio's matching du Maurier set shows some of her more popular books, and while I enjoyed them immensely, the more experimental narratives and subjects tend to be in her lesser known novels.
11nanabee1
I think DduMaurier's Rebecca is one of the greatest mystery novels ever written. I've read all of Agatha Christie, and Dorothy Sayers' works (I consider their work wonderful too). I liked some of the other books DduM wrote but nothing is as good as Rebecca.
The story upfolds and at every turn you feel what the second Mrs. de Winter experienced step by step. This book isn't like the classic murder mystery and everyone is a suspect and one by one eliminated until at the end the detective reveals the truth which she/he knew all along but wouldn't reveal. At the end of Rebecca it was impossible to predict the murder.
In Rebecca, weird turn of events happen and you are confused and curious at each step of the way. Then when you think you understand that Rebecca must have been murdered by her husband the story shifts and becomes even more tangled and mysterious.
It is the perfect English mystery - taking place on a old family estate overlooking the sea, with a mysterious and dark Mrs. Danvers, the little cottage down in the bay, the mysterious retarded house keeper...
The story upfolds and at every turn you feel what the second Mrs. de Winter experienced step by step. This book isn't like the classic murder mystery and everyone is a suspect and one by one eliminated until at the end the detective reveals the truth which she/he knew all along but wouldn't reveal. At the end of Rebecca it was impossible to predict the murder.
In Rebecca, weird turn of events happen and you are confused and curious at each step of the way. Then when you think you understand that Rebecca must have been murdered by her husband the story shifts and becomes even more tangled and mysterious.
It is the perfect English mystery - taking place on a old family estate overlooking the sea, with a mysterious and dark Mrs. Danvers, the little cottage down in the bay, the mysterious retarded house keeper...
12Django6924
>10 maisonvivante:
The Scapegoat really is a fascinating book. I think I mentioned in another thread that it makes an interesting comparison with The Talented Mr. Ripley, which came out two years prior.
The Scapegoat really is a fascinating book. I think I mentioned in another thread that it makes an interesting comparison with The Talented Mr. Ripley, which came out two years prior.
13RMMee
PeterTemplar (>4 petertemplar:) mentioned the short-stories, Don't Look Now and other Stories. Yes, they are dark and at times quite gruesome. Thoroughly enjoyable though. Comparing The Birds in writing with The Birds on film by Alfred Hitchcock - well, the original wins hands down!
14Django6924
>13 RMMee:
To say Du Maurier's birds are better than Hitchcock's is to fall into the apples vs. oranges trap. Granted Hitchcock's film isn't one of his very best (the two leads are miscast, in my opinion), but it has its own interesting dynamics and several cinematic set pieces that are nothing short of brilliant. Du Maurier's story is much more like "Leiningen vs. the Ants" in its portrait of solitary man against an implacably hostile nature, but builds its horror, not just on the collective intelligence of the enemy, but on the inversion of the traditional role of birds as, if not a source of pleasure, at least an innocuous presence for mankind.
I'm not sure a film faithful to the original story would be as entertaining as Hitchcock's version. If the planned remake with George Clooney and Naomi Watts materializes, it will be interesting to see which version it follows.
To say Du Maurier's birds are better than Hitchcock's is to fall into the apples vs. oranges trap. Granted Hitchcock's film isn't one of his very best (the two leads are miscast, in my opinion), but it has its own interesting dynamics and several cinematic set pieces that are nothing short of brilliant. Du Maurier's story is much more like "Leiningen vs. the Ants" in its portrait of solitary man against an implacably hostile nature, but builds its horror, not just on the collective intelligence of the enemy, but on the inversion of the traditional role of birds as, if not a source of pleasure, at least an innocuous presence for mankind.
I'm not sure a film faithful to the original story would be as entertaining as Hitchcock's version. If the planned remake with George Clooney and Naomi Watts materializes, it will be interesting to see which version it follows.
15pinkpaper
he short sory collecion was my first Folio buy as alhouh I have very much enjoyed her novels I think its in her short stories that du Maurier really shines. Shes hard to place but aside from Frenchmans Creek there is very little romance in any of her novels but they are all very readable.
