It must take a brave author to do a follow on book to Daphne Du Maurier’s ‘Rebecca’, but this is what Susan Hill has done. I think Rebecca was calling out for a sequel though – when I read the book I kept looking for more pages to read, the ending was so underwhelming.The good points of Susan Hill’s book for me were:•tShe was brilliantly able to emulate Du Maurier’s sensuous and sensitive descriptions of people, countryside and houses.....and this was a joy. •tSimilarly, she was able to continue Du Maurier’s atmosphere of gothic suspense. I personally find this style too theatrical, too unrealistic and camp – but she was true to the original author so the continuity was good.•tHer ending was an improvement on the original ending. There was a lot more closure, and I found it more satisfactory.The bad points of the book:Well, there was only one bad point, but it was pivotal, and influenced everything in the book. In 'Rebecca' there are two sides shown to our nameless heroine. In the first part of the book she is drippy, drippy, drippy, and any sympathy you may feel for the her situation is steamrollered by her endless references to poor inadequate me. In the second part of the book she picks up, and becomes a lot more feisty. This remodeled, stronger heroine is tons more attractive, and the book generally became a lot more gripping. I think a lot of this hinged on the heroine bucking up her ideas. So, what did Susan Hill do in the sequel? She chose to make our heroine revert to drippy, drippy, drippy mode. Agggggh! How could she have done that! For me, the flabbiness and negativity of the narrator was a continual irritation, and it undermined the momentum of the story to a degree that was seriously off-putting.Having said that, I admire Susan Hill for having a go. I think Rebecca was crying out for a better ending, and Hill’s ending was an improvement on what was there before.
I was looking in the library for a Daphne du Maurier book to take on holiday to Fowey, as that's her home town and I remembered from a previous visit that I'd probably be overcome with the urge to read her work while I was there and thought I'd go prepared. None of the du Mauriers in the library appealed to me but I spotted this instead and decided it would fit the bill nicely. It's a sequel to du Maurier's most famous book Rebecca.This book is narrated again by Maxim de Winter's second wife who manages not to use her own first name again and it is set a decade or so after the events at Manderley. It also covers ""what happened next"" to several other characters - the only one I recalled was Mrs Danvers. Indeed I read Rebecca so long ago that I can only remember the vaguest details - but all the same I thought this was a good read and it seemed plausible enough. I'm going to go and have a look around the web and see what real du Maurier fans thought of it. I enjoyed it though which is all I want really!
Do You like book Mrs. De Winter (1999)?
Sequels to famous novels are tricky things, but this one worked out quite well. It's a long time since I read Rebecca, but it seemed to me that this carried on the atmosphere, the voice of the narrator and the logic of the situation quite convincingly. It always annoyed me that the narrator is unnamed - it annoyed me even more in this extension, though I can see how impossible it would have been for Hill to have named her when du Maurier sud not. I don't really see what the people who didn't like it thought she could have done - it made perfect logical sense to me. It wasn't exciting - but obviously the characters had had rather too much excitement already, a sequel was always going to be about their need for quiet!
—Rachel
Some authors take great books written by other authors and make worthwhile sequels - sadly that was not the case here. I hate this book as much as I love Rebecca. This was utterly disappointing, way too long and really rather boring in many places. It lacked all of the intrigue of the original and often took the cheapest way out of situations imaginable. It was also as depressing as hell but not in an interesting or beautifully tragic way, just in an oh my god are you freaking serious that is what she is going to do to these amazing characters that are not her own? Ugh. I wish I hadn't bothered to read it.
—Maria Kinsley
If you love the original Rebecca do yourself a favor and stay away from this book. Susan Hills kills a good mystery. How dare she destroy such a beloved novel! She does an injustice to the characters and its a bore. She ruins the tale of Maxim and the late Mrs. De Winter. It starts poorly, continues poorly and ends horribly. I wish there could be an invention to erase it from my memory. It took everything out of me not to tear the book up and set it on fire. But that would mean I would have to pay for it since it was a library book. Susan Hills demolishes your personal perception of the De winters life after Manderly. If you want to know what happens to the De winters you are better off writing your own story no one else's sequel would satisfy you. Unless of course if there was a sequel written by Daphne du Maurier herself. That’s the only exception to this. Heed my warning unless you want to be left terribly disappointed.
—Deris
