My Cousin Rachel by Daphne du Maurier


When Miranda chose this for our first Old Fashioned Girls Book Club, I was delighted to have the opportunity to revisit a novel that has long haunted me. Despite the effect it had on me the first time, I had forgotten just how absurdly good it is, and was surprised by how addictive I found it from the very first page. I first read it years ago, when I was a teenager; my mum bought it for me after I devoured Rebecca, and I remember finding it one of the most frustrating reading experiences I’ve ever had. Re-reading it brought rushing back that sense of feeling utterly disempowered by the narrator, and infuriated at not being able to work out the truth of the situation being described. As I closed the pages, I was absolutely exhausted with the emotional strain of it all, and still no more decided upon whether I thought Rachel was evil or innocent than I had been the last time I read it. I had hoped that a second read would highlight previously unnoticed details, and reveal more of a concrete trail of evidence than I had spotted before, but it didn’t at all. Du Maurier’s genius in this novel is in her decision to leave the reader just as uncertain as her narrator; the mysterious Rachel’s true personality is not something that can ever be solved with satisfaction, and so the reader shares completely in the torment of the men who loved and lost her.

The novel opens with the harrowing image of Philip Ashley, the narrator, remembering watching the blackened body of a hanging man swinging when he was a child, having been taken to see it as a lesson by his cousin and guardian Ambrose. Philip has never forgotten seeing that man, someone he had seen regularly in the local town going about his business, brought to this decaying ruin through a crime of passion. It haunts him especially now that he sees himself as a criminal, and he spends the novel explaining how he too is a man condemned thanks to his relationship with his mysterious, beguiling and irresistible cousin Rachel.

Philip, an orphan, was brought up by his much older bachelor cousin Ambrose, whom he adores and admires with an unquestioning devotion. Ambrose owns an impressive mansion and several hundred acres of land near picturesque Bodmin in Cornwall, which Philip knows will all one day be his. He and Ambrose are passionately interested in everything to do with their estate, and so satisfied are they in their own company and surroundings that they have little time or need for others. Ambrose has never sought a wife, and Philip does not anticipate seeking one for himself either, despite everyone thinking that he will eventually marry his godfather’s daughter Louise, who is Philip’s only real friend. They are perfectly happy in their strictly male-only establishment for many years, until Ambrose’s health begins to fail and it is recommended that he goes to the continent for the winter. Ambrose goes and returns without incident a few times, but on what will be his final trip abroad, Philip is surprised to find Ambrose writing to him of a distant relative, Rachel Sangalletti, the widow of an Italian Count, whom he has met in Florence. They seem to be spending a good deal of time together, and Philip is shocked and much upset when Ambrose writes to tell him that he has in fact married Rachel.

Some months pass, with Ambrose’s letters becoming less and less frequent, and Philip is angry at the thought that he has been forgotten by the cousin he loves so much. However, Ambrose’s letters contain increasingly strange comments, and when Philip receives a letter suggesting that Ambrose is in danger from Rachel, and that she is somehow killing him, he leaves immediately for Florence, only to find on his arrival that he has already died, and Rachel has fled. With Ambrose’s cryptic last letter weighing heavily upon him, and suspecting foul play, Philip confides in his godfather, who reveals that Ambrose’s father died of a brain tumour and it seems likely that Ambrose succumbed to the same fate. Philip is not so certain and is determined to blame Rachel, but when she turns up in England, wanting to come and stay at the home that would have been hers, Philip cannot in all decency turn her away. He is determined to hate her, but he is surprised by what he finds in the woman his cousin loved and seemed to despise in equal measure. Rachel is beautiful, intelligent, kind and loving, full of charm and grace and compassion for Philip. Quickly he falls under her spell, and finds himself falling in love, but will this woman be the undoing of him as she has his cousin, and is she quite as innocent as she initially appears?

The growing relationship between Philip and Rachel is fascinating to read, but also infuriating, as it is clear that Philip is an unreliable narrator and cannot be trusted to report the facts. He is possessive and controlling; Rachel is always ‘my’ cousin, a belonging of his, and his obsession with her and desire for her to behave in a way he deems acceptable is disturbing. Does Rachel really behave in the way he depicts her to? Does she mean to come across in the manner Philip perceives her? He is so inexperienced with women, so childish and self centred; can he really understand or attempt to know what a woman is thinking or feeling? Can he be trusted to read a woman’s words or actions with accuracy, given that he has so little knowledge of them? Even so, he is also very convincing in his portrayal of the events, and at the same time as damning Rachel, can see her as an innocent too, and recognise his own paranoia. Just as I decided that she was a horrible, manipulative and deceitful woman, with her eyes purely on the Ashley fortune, I would have seeds of doubt planted in my mind and be able to see an entirely different side to her. It is interesting that a woman is considered untrustworthy and suspicious when she chooses to spend money extravagantly, assert an unpopular right to what is legally hers, or enjoy a close platonic friendship with a member of the opposite sex. If Rachel had been a man, would a reader respond in the same way to her? I wonder. Ultimately, Philip finds Rachel utterly unknowable, and she therefore remains so to the reader right up until the end, too. I could discuss her for hours, dissecting her words and actions until I was blue in the face, but still I don’t think I could come to a conclusion I would be satisfied with. As characters go, Rachel has to be one of the most thought provoking and skilfully written I have ever come across, and if you want to read a book that will have you sitting on the absolute edge of your seat and tearing your hair out by the end, then this is the one for you. I know I shall never quite be able to get Rachel out of my mind!



  1. This sounds like a very interesting book! I’ve read Rebecca, and found that book a bit of a puzzle. I couldn’t figure out how I felt about the story or the writing. I’m fascinated by what you said about how Rachel would have been judged had she been a man instead of a woman. It definitely makes me want to read the book and see. From what you’ve described, it does sound like readers would not have been nearly so ambivalent about her if she’d been male instead of female.

    1. Oh it’s marvellous, and very interesting from a feminist perspective. I’m sure you would enjoy iy, and you should re-read Rebecca to see what you think of it a second time, soon!

  2. One of the best Du Maurier books, I agree. I was also very much struck by it as a teenager, and I loved the ambiguity. You’ve whetted my appetite to reread it.

  3. I’ve not read this but it sounds good. I’m also intrigued by the image at the top of the post – I don’t know what it is but I do know I saw it many years ago in the National Gallery in Scotland! I bought a poster of it at the time and then used it to scaffold a creative writing lesson with my class! But for the life of me I can’t remember the name or artist – so I’m hoping you’ll read this and put me out of my misery!

  4. I reread this recently too! (Spurred on by seeing the BBC adaptation of Jamaica Inn, but without a copy of JI so I contented myself with various other of her works.) I can’t remember if I blogged about it. It was even better than I had remembered, as MarinaSofia says, one of the best. So very brilliantly done.

    Col – to pre-empt Rachel, the painting is by John Singer Sargent, I had forgotten who the subject was but it’s Lady Agnew of Lochnaw, says Wikipedia. A perfect accompaniement to the post!

    1. It is so cleverly written, I think. Du Maurier was a genius. I wanted to read Jamaica Inn too, when the tv series was announced, but I don’t have a copy. Now I definitely want to branch out to reading more of her books. Thank you for pre-empting me on the painting!

  5. I love the new book club. The first book was a real winner. I can’t wait for the discussion about The Provincial Lady in Wartime.

  6. I’m currently reading a collection of du Maurier’s short stories (my first du Maurier!!) and I’m loving these stories at the moment.

    Reading your review makes me want to read My Cousin Rachel as well. But then I also want to read Rebecca. Hahaha, now I’m confused.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s