Karyn Kar Mun (Thy Evil Queen)’s comment > Likes and Comments
Like
They said it was Caroline in the scene of the party, but I think that was an incorrect name.
I'd just call her Joan Fontaine, as she did very well in the role!
Xanthe is an unusual name and difficult to spell
A good name would be Clarynda de Winter. An unusual spelling for Clarinda. I believe the intent was there not to name her. Rebecca was the name to linger in everyone's mind, not the second Mrs. de Winter. Did anyone catch Mrs. Danvers' forbidden love for Rebecca? I saw an underlying hint. Maybe that's just me, always looking for something else.
Don't flatter yourself, the homoeroticism was obvious.
I don't believe du Maurier simply forgot to name the protagonist. In my opinion it has a lot to do with identity. The protagonist is overshadowed by the omnipresence of Rebecca, a person with a big persona it seems, so she is belittled all the time - until near the end she gets her identity as Mrs. de Winter. Du Maurier didn't provide much information on the "I", she doesn't have any family, no money, she is assistant to a rich American widow (but she herself is British), the reader doesn't leanr much besides her favourite pasttime "drawing", that she is shy, and that she is somewhat peculiar.
I agree with you, Antonie! I think the absence of a name underscores her lack of personal identity. She finds it hard to be her own person, so maybe she will "find her name" later, beyond the story.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
They said it was Caroline in the scene of the party, but I think that was an incorrect name.
I'd just call her Joan Fontaine, as she did very well in the role!
Xanthe is an unusual name and difficult to spell
A good name would be Clarynda de Winter. An unusual spelling for Clarinda. I believe the intent was there not to name her. Rebecca was the name to linger in everyone's mind, not the second Mrs. de Winter. Did anyone catch Mrs. Danvers' forbidden love for Rebecca? I saw an underlying hint. Maybe that's just me, always looking for something else.
Don't flatter yourself, the homoeroticism was obvious.
I don't believe du Maurier simply forgot to name the protagonist. In my opinion it has a lot to do with identity. The protagonist is overshadowed by the omnipresence of Rebecca, a person with a big persona it seems, so she is belittled all the time - until near the end she gets her identity as Mrs. de Winter. Du Maurier didn't provide much information on the "I", she doesn't have any family, no money, she is assistant to a rich American widow (but she herself is British), the reader doesn't leanr much besides her favourite pasttime "drawing", that she is shy, and that she is somewhat peculiar.
I agree with you, Antonie! I think the absence of a name underscores her lack of personal identity. She finds it hard to be her own person, so maybe she will "find her name" later, beyond the story.
Going back to the first few chapters of "Rebecca", I found:
1) "... Mrs Van Hopper... waved a vague hand in my direction and mumbled my name."
2) (When Maxim sends a note to TG) "But my name was on the envelope, and spelt correctly, an unusual thing."
3) (Maxim tells TG)
"You have a very lovely and unusual name."
4) (A short while later, Maxim again tells TG)
"I told you at the beginning of lunch you had a lovely and unusual name..."
4 mentions regarding the 2nd wife's name. But never revealing what that name might be.
The way I see it, that omission was deliberate. The author might have wanted to give an unusual, unique, thought-provoking touch to her book. Very understandably.
Or else, (and we can empathize with this too) after a lot of effort, she was still not able to decide which name would be special enough, and therefore chose not to give TG a name at all.