My Cousin Rachel
Summary (from the publisher): Orphaned at an early age, Philip Ashley is raised by his benevolent older cousin, Ambrose. Resolutely single, Ambrose delights in Philip as his heir, a man who will love his grand home as much as he does himself. But the cozy world the two construct is shattered when Ambrose sets off on a trip to Florence. There he falls in love and marries - and there he dies suddenly. Jealous of his marriage, racked by suspicion at the hints in Ambrose's letters, and grief-stricken by his death, Philip prepares to meet his cousin's widow with hatred in his heart. Despite himself, Philip is drawn to this beautiful, sophisticated, mysterious Rachel like a moth to the flame. And yet . . . might she have had a hand in Ambrose's death?
Review: I read Rebecca in high school and loved it yet mysteriously, for unknown reasons, never sought out any other du Maurier novels until now. Like Rebecca, My Cousin Rachel falls into the Gothic romance category and is just as suspenseful as du Maurier's better known work. The novel is narrated by Philip Ashley, who was raised by his older and determinedly single cousin, Ambrose. Philip is raised with the expectation that he will be the heir to Ambrose's estate and fortune. While away in Florence, Ambrose unexpectedly marries the mysterious Rachel - and then dies even more mysteriously. Philip, who has never met his cousin's bride, suspects Rachel was somehow involved in his cousin's death and prepares revenge, yet instead finds himself drawn to Rachel when the two finally meet.
The central conceit of this novel is the question of did she or didn't she? The reader is kept guessing until the bitter end. As much damning evidence as there is against Rachel, there's just as much to make you suspect that maybe she's innocent. Yes, there were troubling letters smuggled to Philip by a dying Ambrose, and Rachel's suspicious male friend, and her apparent extravagant spending. And how exactly did her first husband die? But what about that pesky detail about brain disorders running in Ambrose and Philip's family? Could both Ambrose and Philip suspect her because they are literally going mad? And can we really trust Philip? After all, his guardian and friends find his choices rash. Or is it instead all coincidence as Philip's godfather suggests: "There are some women, Philip,' he observed, ' good women very possibly, who through no fault of their own impel disaster. Whatever they touch somehow turns to tragedy" (212).
Possibly the most tragic figure in this novel is Philip's friend Louise. Despite constantly being neglected or insulted by Philip, she remains steadfast and loyal. She also remains the most level headed in the face of Rachel's apparently considerable charm. Louise also succinctly concludes the dilemma of Rachel's suspected involvement in Ambrose's death: "If there is no proof,' said Louise, 'you cannot condemn her. She may be innocent. She may be guilty. You can do nothing" (287).
Philip is clearly an unreliable narrator, as his reason and objectivity surrounding Rachel continue to decline as the novel progresses and his infatuation with Rachel deepens. Despite witnessing that those around him are appalled and concerned about his continued lack of judgment when it comes to Rachel, he proceeds full steam ahead. Du Maurier has skillfully planted enough evidence to make the reader suspicious of Rachel, but also enough doubt to compel the narrative forward.
Stars: 4
Review: I read Rebecca in high school and loved it yet mysteriously, for unknown reasons, never sought out any other du Maurier novels until now. Like Rebecca, My Cousin Rachel falls into the Gothic romance category and is just as suspenseful as du Maurier's better known work. The novel is narrated by Philip Ashley, who was raised by his older and determinedly single cousin, Ambrose. Philip is raised with the expectation that he will be the heir to Ambrose's estate and fortune. While away in Florence, Ambrose unexpectedly marries the mysterious Rachel - and then dies even more mysteriously. Philip, who has never met his cousin's bride, suspects Rachel was somehow involved in his cousin's death and prepares revenge, yet instead finds himself drawn to Rachel when the two finally meet.
The central conceit of this novel is the question of did she or didn't she? The reader is kept guessing until the bitter end. As much damning evidence as there is against Rachel, there's just as much to make you suspect that maybe she's innocent. Yes, there were troubling letters smuggled to Philip by a dying Ambrose, and Rachel's suspicious male friend, and her apparent extravagant spending. And how exactly did her first husband die? But what about that pesky detail about brain disorders running in Ambrose and Philip's family? Could both Ambrose and Philip suspect her because they are literally going mad? And can we really trust Philip? After all, his guardian and friends find his choices rash. Or is it instead all coincidence as Philip's godfather suggests: "There are some women, Philip,' he observed, ' good women very possibly, who through no fault of their own impel disaster. Whatever they touch somehow turns to tragedy" (212).
Possibly the most tragic figure in this novel is Philip's friend Louise. Despite constantly being neglected or insulted by Philip, she remains steadfast and loyal. She also remains the most level headed in the face of Rachel's apparently considerable charm. Louise also succinctly concludes the dilemma of Rachel's suspected involvement in Ambrose's death: "If there is no proof,' said Louise, 'you cannot condemn her. She may be innocent. She may be guilty. You can do nothing" (287).
Philip is clearly an unreliable narrator, as his reason and objectivity surrounding Rachel continue to decline as the novel progresses and his infatuation with Rachel deepens. Despite witnessing that those around him are appalled and concerned about his continued lack of judgment when it comes to Rachel, he proceeds full steam ahead. Du Maurier has skillfully planted enough evidence to make the reader suspicious of Rachel, but also enough doubt to compel the narrative forward.
Stars: 4
Comments
Post a Comment