Review | The Driver's Seat by Muriel Spark

The Driver's Seat

by Muriel Spark

My Rating:

Lise is thin, neither good-looking nor bad-looking. One day she walks out of her office, acquires a gaudy new outfit, adopts a girlier tone of voice, and heads to the airport to fly south. On the plane she takes a seat between two men. One is delighted with her company, the other is deeply perturbed. So begins an unnerving journey into the darker recesses of human nature.

I read my first Muriel Spark novel last year when I finally read The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie and I enjoyed it enough to check out more of Spark's work. I'd heard so many good things about The Driver's Seat and now that I've read it I can safely say it's probably one of the most disturbing books I've ever read. And I really liked it.

This is one of those books that deserves to be read in one sitting - it's only around 100 pages long, so it can easily be read in one night - and once it's finished there's a good chance you'll need to let it stew before you can figure out how you feel about it, but however you feel at the end of it this book is certainly an experience.

Lise, bored with her office job, decides to go on holiday, but everything has to be perfect. She finds a new outfit, creates a new persona for herself and sits between two men on the plane. What follows is deliciously dark.

It's difficult to review this book without giving anything away, and while Spark herself tells the reader what's going to happen at the end long before the end I don't really want to spoil the surprise for anyone out there who wants to read it. (If you'd like to read a review that includes spoilers, check out my review on Goodreads here). All I will say is that The Driver's Seat was described (by Muriel Spark herself, I believe) as a whydunnit rather than a whodunnit; who commits the crime within these pages isn't important, but why the crime is committed is the focus of the book and it's written so brilliantly. Spark has a real talent for writing peculiar, unhinged women and it wouldn't surprise me if Gillian Flynn had learned a thing or two from her.

I would have liked to have gotten into Lise's head a little more, which is why I didn't give The Driver's Seat five stars. We're always held at a distance from her, though the book still packs a real punch, but I'm not sure if I got enough why from this whydunnit or if Spark intended for us to fill in the blanks ourselves. This book will stay with me, though, and I'm going to be recommending the hell out of it to people just so I have someone I can talk to about it.

Review | Jamaica Inn by Daphne du Maurier

Jamaica Inn

by Daphne du Maurier

My Rating: 

Her mother's dying request takes Mary Yellan on a sad journey across the bleak moorland of Cornwall to reach Jamaica Inn, the home of her Aunt Patience. With the coachman's warning echoing in her memory, Mary arrives at a dismal place to find Patience a changed woman, cowering from her overbearing husband, Joss Merlyn. 

Affected by the Inn's brooding power, Mary is thwarted in her attention to reform her aunt, and unwillingly drawn into the dark deeds of Joss and his accomplices. And, as she struggles with events beyond her control, Mary is further thrown by her feelings for a man she dare not trust...

If Daphne du Maurier had only ever written Rebecca, she'd still be a famous author now. Luckily for us, du Maurier wrote a heck of a lot!

Rebecca, Frenchman's Creek and Jamaica Inn are du Maurier's most well-known novels, and as I've already read Rebecca and Frenchman's Creek, I figured it was about time I got Jamaica Inn under my belt - especially as I might be visiting the real Jamaica Inn later this year!

For me du Maurier is such an easy author to read; I open a du Maurier book and I sink into the story, and Jamaica Inn was no different. Mary Yellan, like all of du Maurier's heroines I've read so far, is so present and jumps from the page. What I love about du Maurier is that she wrote so much, a lot of it historical fiction, and yet none of her work ever feels samey; The Second Mrs. de Winter, Dona St. Columb and Mary Yellan are all so separate from each other, and when pretty much everything du Maurier wrote is compared with Rebecca I love that she wrote so many different kinds of stories so it's almost impossible to directly compare any of her other work with Rebecca. (Aside, perhaps, from My Cousin Rachel, which I've heard is the closest of her novels to Rebecca).

Where Dona St. Columb is privileged and selfish and The Second Mrs. de Winter is meek and shy, Mary Yellan is a tough, salt of the earth kind of girl; she's not afraid of hard work and she's no stranger to how difficult life can be. Mary doesn't have any fantasies about falling passionately in love or becoming an advocate for woman's rights, she just wants to live in the countryside and run her own farm. But when your fate's in Daphne du Maurier's hands, you're destined for something more troublesome than farmwork.

After Mary's beloved mother dies she's sent to Bodmin Moor to live with her Aunt Patience at Jamaica Inn, but when she arrives she discovers that the bubbly, lovely woman she remembers has transformed into a woman who is constantly terrified, thanks to her brutish husband Joss Merlyn. Mary works at her uncle and aunt's inn, where no one ever stays, and soon discovers Jamaica Inn's dangerous secret, all while battling the strange attraction she feels to Joss's younger brother, Jem.

Considering Jamaica Inn was written before Rebecca, I've always thought it unfair that readers who read Rebecca first mark Jamaica Inn down because it isn't Rebecca, but now that I've read Jamaica Inn myself, having read Rebecca, I can understand their point of view a whole lot more. I didn't compare Jamaica Inn with Rebecca, they're two very different stories, but they do have similar themes; they're both fairly Gothic, with heroines in isolated places that feel like characters in their own right, and questionable love interests. In my edition of Jamaica Inn there's an introduction from historical fiction author Sarah Dunant, who claims that in Jamaica Inn it's easy to see that du Maurier was 'on her way' to Rebecca, and I'd agree with that, there's just that extra something missing from Jamaica Inn that makes Rebecca so special.

The more I think about it, the more I think the main problem I had with Jamaica Inn is that it's trying to be two different novels at once. Set in Cornwall, at the height of Cornish smuggling, there's not quite enough action to make this an adventurous, historical romp - Mary spends most of her time cooped up in Jamaica Inn or wandering alone on Bodmin Moor - but at the same time it's not quite slow-moving and atmospheric enough to be the kind of Gothic novel that Rebecca is. It never fully satisfies either type of story, so I couldn't fall in love with it the same way I fell in love with du Maurier's other work.

While this may be my least favourite du Maurier so far, though I still really enjoyed it, I do think Jamaica Inn has a fascinating villain. I won't say too much, I don't want to spoil it for anyone (though I have a feeling the villain is fairly obvious once you get into the book) but he was both unsettling and yet strangely enticing. In fact the villain may have been my favourite character in the book, because while Mary is written very well, as are Jem, Joss and Patience, she just didn't capture me quite as much as the villain did.

As I said above Mary is very different from the other du Maurier heroines I've met, and that I did really appreciate; both Dona and The Second Mrs. de Winter are romantic people, in very different ways, and while Mary does experience a romance of her own it's very different to the other du Maurier books I've read. Mary thinks about romance in the same way she thinks about animals on the farm - at some point it's natural for them to gravitate towards a member of the opposite sex, even produce offspring, but it's not something they think passionately about, if they think about it at all. I found it really refreshing to meet a heroine who was written in the '30s who has such a casual, practical opinion of relationships.

Ultimately Jamaica Inn is well-written, easy to read and a lot of fun, as well as being sinister in places, and I did enjoy it. If you ever find yourself stranded on Bodmin Moor, this would be the perfect book to have with you!

Book vs. Adaptation | Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier (Part Two)

On Monday I discussed Alfred Hitchcock's 1940 adaptation of Rebecca (you can check that post out here!), and today I'm back to talk about the 1997 miniseries.

This adaptation was first broadcast on ITV in the UK and PBS in the US; it's around 180 minutes long and is split into two episodes. Emilia Fox stars as Mrs. de Winter in her very first leading role. Opposite her are Charles Dance as Maxim de Winter and Dame Diana Rigg as Mrs. Danvers; two actors who would later also star opposite each other in HBO's Game of Thrones.

That's it. That's the show.

Unlike the previous film, Daphne du Maurier never saw this adaptation; she passed away in 1989 at the ripe old age of 81 - in fact this adaptation was broadcast 90 years after her birth! I think she would have been pleased with this adaptation, though; luckily for us, Rebecca is one of those rare novels which doesn't have a lack of decent adaptations for us to seek out, whether you're interested in a radio production, a film, a television series, a play or even an opera!

What I loved most about this adaptation is little Emilia Fox, whose portrayal of Mrs. de Winter is practically perfect. The cast as a whole is wonderful in this adaptation - it's not a bad adaptation at all - and I think both Charles Dance and Diana Rigg are wonderful. For me, though, I prefer Laurence Olivier and Judith Anderson's portrayals of these characters; I think Charles Dance is a brilliant Maxim, I particularly like how much older than Emilia Clarke he looks because there is definitely a peculiar paternal relationship between Maxim and his second wife as much as a romantic one, but in my head Laurence Olivier looks a lot more like Maxim than Charles Dance does.

Similarly, as much as I love Diana Rigg, and as much as I think her portrayal of Mrs. Danvers is fantastic, there's just no competition with Judith Anderson. Anderson's Mrs. Danvers is perfection and her shoes are awfully big ones to fill, though they do both bring something different to the role; Diana Rigg's portrayal is more vulnerable than Judith Anderson's - not softer, because nothing about Mrs. Danvers is soft - but she feels more human and more beatable. Perhaps that's why, if I had to pick, I'd rather watch Hitchcock's adaptation; villains are a lot more fun when they seem invincible.

Unlike the 1940 adaptation, however, I do think this adaptation's version of Mrs. de Winter is much more similar to the book, in fact the adaptation as a whole is a perfect adaptation whereas the 1940 adaptation makes tiny tweaks here and there. To say Emilia Fox is a 'better' Mrs. de Winter than Joan Fontaine is some praise to give to a woman in her very first leading role, but Emilia Fox's Mrs. de Winter has none of the glamour that an actress like Joan Fontaine can't not have. I think being very new to acting onscreen - before this her first screen appearance was in the 1995 adaptation of Pride and Prejudice - aided her in portraying that child-like, innocent and nervous way Mrs. de Winter carries herself throughout the majority of Rebecca; she even looks like a child dressing up as an adult.

Emilia Fox as Mrs. de Winter and Dame Diana Rigg as Mrs. Danvers.

In fact I can't help wondering if they based Mrs. de Winter's appearance off Daphne du Maurier's own appearance in her younger years.

Daphne du Maurier in her youth.

It wouldn't surprise me if they had based Mrs. de Winter on du Maurier herself; it's believed that Manderley is based on Menabilly, the house du Maurier restored and lived in for a while, and her husband Frederick Browning was nine years her senior.

Daphne du Maurier with her husband, Frederick Browning, and their three children.

So if you're after a decent adaptation of Rebecca, both the 1940 adaptation and the 1997 adaptation are worth checking out. I won't say one is better than the other because I think whichever adaptation you prefer is all down to personal taste, but in my opinion neither of them are poor adaptations. If you're in the mood for a direct adaptation, for a period drama, then I recommend the 1997 adaptation, but if you want to watch something that totally captures the atmosphere of the novel I recommend Hitchcock's adaptation - it's a brilliant film to watch as Halloween approaches!

Book vs. Adaptation | Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier (Part One)

I'm back today with another Book vs. Adaptation post, and the second Halloween-themed adaptation chat this month. If you want to see me chat about Henry Selick's adaptation of Neil Gaiman's Coraline, you can check it out here!

Today, however, I'm going to be talking about Alfred Hitchcock's adaptation of Daphne du Maurier's masterpiece, Rebecca.

Rebecca was published in 1938, and Hitchcock's adaptation followed two years later in 1940. The film is 130 minutes long and stars Joan Fontaine, Laurence Olivier and Judith Anderson.

After I finished reading Rebecca - a book I read around this time last year, and one I've thought about a lot since - I wasn't all that surprised to discover Hitchcock had adapted it; if anyone could adapt an exquisitely psychologically book that creeps under your skin and takes root there the way Rebecca does, it'd be this man. However, Daphne du Maurier considered withholding the film rights to Rebecca after seeing Hitchcock's 1939 adaptation of Jamaica Inn which, despite making an awful lot of money upon its release, was disliked by critics, by du Maurier and even by Hitchcock himself for completely lacking any of the suspense the novel has and turning the story into something of a comic romp. Luckily for us it seems du Maurier trusted Hitchcock to get her masterpiece right.

And did he? Yes, I'd say he did.

My mum and I are both fans of du Maurier, it's one of the few things we have in common, so one gloomy summer night we decided to watch it together and the two of us really enjoyed it!

This adaptation isn't without its faults by any means. There are the odd tweaks to the plot, but for the most part it's a very faithful and very atmospheric adaptation. Laurence Olivier makes for a tortured yet charming Maxim de Winter and Joan Fontaine, though a little too beautiful for Mrs. de Winter for me - she's a character I've always pictured as very plain, and Joan Fontaine is anything but that - certainly acts the part of Mrs. de Winter beautifully.

The star of this film for me, however, is Judith Anderson whose portrayal of the villainous Mrs. Danvers is just perfect. The woman's terrifying! She's quiet, still and so threatening, but threatening in the same way that voice in the back of your mind is when you're having a rough day; Mrs. Danvers is that part of our subconscious who makes us feel ashamed when we treat ourselves to that extra slice of cake or feel stupid when we introduce ourselves to new people. Perhaps it's just the English student in me, but there are times when, to me, Mrs. Danvers is the perfect personification of anxiety.

Something else I really loved about this adaptation is that we never see Rebecca. Some adaptations have her appear in flashbacks, but in this adaptation she doesn't appear at all and it makes her presence even more keenly felt because of it. We don't need to see her, we just need to see her 'R' emblazoned on almost everything Mrs. de Winter touches. 

(I promise that isn't a spoiler. Maxim de Winter is introduced as a widow very early on in the book, something I imagine most people can guess from the blurb anyway!)

Yes this film's old and yes it's in black and white, but I recommend checking it out. I was so surprised when I discovered it was made in 1940 because for such an early film I think it's pretty fantastic, and if black and white films bother you I promise that, after a while, you won't even notice it - in fact it really suits the mood of the film. I highly, highly suggest only watching this after you've read the book, though; it's one of those books which, whatever your tastes, I think everyone should read. It's that good.

Hitchcock's adaptation of du Maurier's work didn't stop here, either. The Birds (1963), probably his most famous film next to Psycho, is based off one of du Maurier's short stories. I think it's safe to say Hitchcock was a du Maurier fan, just stay away from his adaptation of Jamaica Inn!

I'll be back to discuss the 1997 miniseries soon!

Review | To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

To Kill a Mockingbird

by Harper Lee

My Rating: 

'Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird.'

A lawyer's advice to his children as he defends the real mockingbird of Harper Lee's classic novel - a black man charged with the rape of a white girl. Through the young eyes of Scout and Jem Finch, Harper Lee explores with exuberant humour the irrationality of adult attitudes to race and class in the Deep South of the thirties. The conscience of a town steeped in prejudice, violence and hypocrisy is pricked by the stamina of one man's struggle for justice. But the weight of history will only tolerate so much.

To Kill a Mockingbird is a coming-of-age story, an anti-racist novel, a historical drama of the Great Depression and a sublime example of the Southern writing tradition.

Yeah, yeah, I know, the whole world and his wife has read this. In fact nowadays I'm pretty sure babies emerge from the womb already having read it, but I didn't get around to this classic until this year.

But why? I imagine to hear you ask for the sake of this review. Why has it taken you so long to read the most stupendous book of all time? Didn't you do English Lit at uni? What's the matter with you?

Well, friend, I'll tell you. First of all, I'm British; I was born and raised, for the most part, in England, and in England you tend to look at British authors. I read Shakespeare, Charlotte Brontë and Seamus Heaney at school, and though we did branch out into international authors when I reached my GCSE years, the American book chosen for us was Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men. In fact nobody at my school read To Kill a Mockingbird.

When I did my A Levels I read a little more American Literature, this time Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, and I loathed it. I know everyone loves it, but I just couldn't stand it. It's so depressing - yes, I know that's the point - but the practical part of me couldn't help thinking 'dude, just move house!' throughout the entire novel. I had to force myself to finish it, and sadly, though it shouldn't have, it put me off American Lit for a while.

And the third reason I didn't get around to it until this year was for the simple, stubborn reason that everyone told me I should read it. Hyped books make me very wary, because so often we can build ourselves up to expect one thing and then be incredibly disappointed when we get something else entirely. I wanted to read To Kill a Mockingbird, but only when I could go into it with no expectations or preconceptions whatsoever; the same reason I didn't read Rebecca until last year.

So now that I've read it, did I love it? Yes. I really, really did.

I was almost disappointed when I realised how much I'd enjoyed the book, like I was just 'conforming' or some other ridiculous notion, and then I realised how stupid that was. Some people are cruel enough to say that other people say this is their favourite book because they want to sound smart, and while that may very well be true in some cases (but who cares if it is?) the fact of the matter is some books are well-loved for a reason, and this is one such book.

I found Harper Lee's writing so comforting and welcoming, and it settled in me like a delicious roast dinner on a cold day. Scout is a charming protagonist, and she and Jem both felt so real to me; I felt as though I was reading a book by a woman who hadn't forgotten what it was really like to be a child.

And then, of course, there's Atticus, who frankly I was incredibly attracted to. What can I say? I like an older man.

I adored the cast of characters Lee created, from the Finches to Boo Radley to Tom Robinson, and I was surprised by how lovely the book was. When a book is described as an anti-racist novel or an anti-sexist novel or an anti-any sort of 'ist' novel, it can be difficult not to expect it to be incredibly heavy handed, to knock you over the head with its message so hard you see stars. I didn't feel that with this book at all, and I think a lot of that has to do with it being a coming-of-age novel. 

When a story is told through the eyes of a child, who is still learning the difference between what is and isn't right and what she believes is and isn't right, any message the book is trying to convey immediately feels all the more authentic because we can see how the characters reach their ultimate conclusion of how they perceive the world. Had the book been from Atticus's point of view, I think it would have been incredibly preachy to the point of disbelief. It's hard to believe anyone could be as perfect as Atticus, but we can believe he might seem that way through the eyes of his children.

I loved this book, but I don't think I would have if I'd read it when everyone was telling me to. I needed to approach it in my own way at my own time, and I encourage any of you who haven't read it, but are considering it, to do the same. And if you have no intention of ever reading it, that's fine. This book might be a well-loved classic, but don't force your way through a book you don't think is for you when you could be reading something else you love.

TBR | Modern Classics

I've come to terms with the fact that my TBR's never going to be small, but it's certainly much larger than I'd like it to be; no matter how much I read it never seems to be enough!

When it comes to classics I always felt most at home in the Victorian period. When I was at university I loved learning about 19th century literature most - Victorian Gothic is so much fun, plus it's during the 19th century that we first got children's literature and detective fiction! - but in recent years I've begun to appreciate modern classics much more, and I've become particularly fond of fiction written during the early 20th century and the '50s.

Anyway, here are some modern classics I'd like to cross off my TBR this year!

The Handmaid's Tale

by Margaret Atwood

Offred is a Handmaid in the Republic of Gilead. She has only one function: to breed. If she deviates, she will, like dissenters, be hanged at the wall or sent out to die slowly of radiation sickness. But even a repressive state cannot obliterate desire - neither Offred's nor that of the two men on which her future hangs.

The Sundial

by Shirley Jackson

When the Halloran clan gathers at the family home for a funeral, no one is surprised when the somewhat peculiar Aunt Fanny wanders off into the secret garden. But then she returns to report an astonishing vision of an apocalypse from which only the Hallorans and their hangers-on will be spared, and the family finds itself engulfed in growing madness, fear, and violence as they prepare for a terrible new world.

Jamaica Inn

by Daphne du Maurier

Her mother's dying request takes Mary Yellan on a sad journey across the bleak moorland of Cornwall to reach Jamaica Inn, the home of her Aunt Patience. With the coachman's warning echoing in her memory, Mary arrives at a dismal place to find Patience a changed woman, cowering from her overbearing husband, Joss Merlyn. 

Affected by the Inn's brooding power, Mary is thwarted in her attention to reform her aunt, and unwillingly drawn into the dark deeds of Joss and his accomplices. And, as she struggles with events beyond her control, Mary is further thrown by her feelings for a man she dare not trust...

The Chrysalids

by John Wyndham

David Storm's father doesn't approve of Angus Morton's unusually large horses, calling them blasphemies against nature. Little does he realise that his own son, and his son's cousin Rosalind and their friends, have their own secret aberration which would label them as mutants. But as David and Rosalind grow older it becomes more difficult to conceal their differences from the village elders. Soon they face a choice: wait for eventual discovery, or flee to the terrifying and mutable Badlands....

Classics & Contemporaries | Daphne du Maurier Edition

I didn't want to start my new blogging year without a new installment of Classics & Contemporaries, but recently I haven't been doing enough research to write another, more indepth post. So today, like the previous installment (found here!), I'm going to give you some quick recommendations for one of my new favourite authors whom I discovered at the end of 2014: Daphne du Maurier!

I highly recommend checking du Maurier out! She wrote everything from novels (in genres from historical fiction to post-apocalyptic) to non-fiction and short fiction - the woman was a writing machine!

If you like Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

Read Rebecca

If you like A Mad, Wicked Folly by Sharon Biggs Waller

Read Mary Anne

If you like Vivian Versus the Apocalypse by Katie Coyle

Read Rule Britannia

If you like Outlander by Diana Gabaldon

Read The House on the Strand