Talk:Rebecca (novel)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pertinent Content for Sections, Moving Content to Related Articles (Danvers, de Winter)[edit]

Some of the content does not pertain to the section headers under which it is currently located. Additionally, there are separate article for Mrs. De Winter and Mrs. Danvers and recommend sectioning off character detail to those articles with a see reference. Will try to introduce information from reliable sources that pertains directly to the book as a whole (maybe sales stats, printing history etc.)JBVaughan (talk) 16:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rumors[edit]

"though there are some rumours of the try-out happening in Toronto, Canada" Things that are merely rumors have ABSOLUTELY NO PLACE IN AN ENCYCLOPEDIA SUCH AS THE WIPIKEDIA -- and why can't people get that through their thick heads? Has the educational level on this planet fallen to such an utterly low level??98.67.175.3 (talk) 17:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easy, boy. Take a deep breath and tell us calmly what the hell you're talking about, there's a good lad. Illuvater01 (talk) 13:53, 25 September 2009 (UTC)Illuvater01[reply]

Removed rumour, added citation, hope that calms things !GrahamHardy (talk) 14:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was Rebecca really evil?[edit]

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 people's eyes, predominantly Max's eyes (O.K. also through Mrs. Danvers's 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)[reply]

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 claimed Rebecca was evil, but simply that 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 describe 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[reply]

I don't get a sense in the book anywhere that, underneath it all, Rebecca had redeeming human characteristics. Among other things, the local half-wit is terrified of her! (Sorry...not usually a good sign.) Plus, as the synopsis correctly states, there's no real evidence Mrs. Danvers or anyone else set fire to the house at the end (though this is shown in the movie), which gives the revelation of the truth about Rebecca a supernatural, fiery combustion. A house content newlyweds are returning to suddenly bursting into flames isn't a very peaceful image of a soul being set free, or anything like that. It's more demonic. Codenamemary (talk) 22:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One could argue that Rebecca as a character appears to be psychopathic: self-centered, ruthless, manipulative, the classic charming psychopath. But these speculations have no place in the article. Invertzoo (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Plot summary[edit]

Is there any reason that this has been removed? --Cherry blossom tree 21:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

trivia[edit]

I've reworded the section as impact on culture and removed some obscure references which were incomprehensible. what does phrase "the blue outskirts of london" in the first article mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.228.173 (talk) 12:23, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca.jpg[edit]

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)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca first.jpg[edit]

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)[reply]

Mrs de Winter[edit]

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)[reply]

Place of writing?[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

You need to include the reference in the section of the main article. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 12:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

Sorry, but how do I do that? I am new here. Katie1971 (talk) 12:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added like so - please check I got the details right. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca first.jpg[edit]

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)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:DaphneDuMaurier Rebecca.jpg[edit]

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)[reply]

Location of Manderley[edit]

It is often stated that Manderley is in Cornwall, and in fact Du Maurier lived for many years in a Cornish house with a similar name. However, the location of Manderley is not precisely stated in the book, and the county in which it sits is not specified. It is however referred to as being six hours drive to the West of London, and in a county with both a south and a north coast and therefore can only realistically be in either Cornwall or Devon.Oinky (talk) 13:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca as German code source[edit]

I've been unable to find any other references to Rebecca having been used as a code source by the Germans during World War II. Does anyone else know whether this is true (and if so, can you give a source please?) -Elizabennet | talk 16:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I tracked down something, although not all the details agrees with what's written here. I'll see if I can find anything else. Mighty Antar (talk) 23:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B&W movie?[edit]

"In The Maxx issue #31, a teenage Julie Winters watches a black and white version of the movie." Which movie? The Hitchcock version? It was filmed in B&W, and there is no other version. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 10:28, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Operatic adaptation[edit]

Rebecca was adapted as an opera with music by Wilfred Josephs, premier by Opera North in Leeds, England, Oct 15 1983

ref 'The Times', Monday, Oct 17, 1983; pg. 15; Issue 61665; col A (Article CS252153169)

http://callisto.ggsrv.com/imgsrv/Fetch?banner=4fb2e4c5&digest=923dbba7b90430b5802ce5ffffadc559&contentSet=LT&recordID=0FFO-1983-OCT17-015-F&highlight=ff99ff+1+336+4749+169+47+503+4752+181+46+116+4787+166+45&format=png&scale=0.330&crop=28+1368+779+423 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandchant (talk • contribs) 23:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar[edit]

I wonder if space could be found for a comment on the remarkable grammar of the openimg paragraph in which "dreamt" and "dreamed" are given slightly different senses. Bukovets (talk) 15:47, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reading[edit]

Reading : Learn English through Story (Youtube) has an excellent reading of the story. I don't know if this warrants inclusion, though.Kdammers (talk) 10:18, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Rebecca (novel). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Second Mrs. de Winter's name[edit]

Though never revealed, the comment by the narrator that her name being spelled correctly is "unusual" points to the author of the novel imagining the character to possess her own name (about whose spelling and, for that matter, pronunciation, a surprising number of English speakers are ever so often unsure), pointing to a strong personal identification of the author with the narrator as her fictional alter ego.


Request to add connection to other article[edit]

Hi, I've been working on editing the Gothic double article for the past few months. It is still classified as a stub so I'm looking to divert some more traffic to the article in order for its classification to go up. I have a section on how the motif is used in Rebecca, and was wondering if I could please add a sentence or two in this article mentioning the use of the motif, and with a hyperlink to my own article? Please let me know. Thank you so much! Snowdrop Fairy (talk) 07:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Snowdrop Fairy, Gothic double looks a nice article. According to its talk page it was rated C class a couple of days ago, which seems reasonable. Classifications are added and updated manually by any interested editor, and are based on the article quality, not on how much traffic it gets, so while adding appropriate links in other articles is generally helpful, it won't in itself help to change the classification. You're welcome to add a sentence or two to this article, provided of course that it adds to an understanding of the book and that you include at least one suitable source. You don't need to ask permission. Btw, don't forget that new sections on talk pages should always be added to the bottom of the page, not to the top. I've moved this section down. MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for your help. I'm very new to Wikipedia so I'm not sure about etiquette and how everything works, so thank you for your advice. I'll add a sentence or two which explains the use of the Gothic double motif, making sure that it adds to a good understanding of the book. Snowdrop Fairy (talk) 09:07, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Opening and closing lines[edit]

The current article suggests that the poetic meter of the opening and closing lines is notable. I am slightly confused though...whilst I can see that the opening line is in iambic pentameter, I can't parse the final line as being anapaestic tetrameter. As I read it, the rhythm is 3 soft beats followed by one hard beat, which would be quartus paean rhythm. Before I edit this, does anyone else have any thoughts on this, or a reference for the current assertion? Simongregor (talk) 19:50, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rebecca_(novel)&oldid=1194840447"