Daphne: A Portrait of Daphne Du Maurier

by Judith Cook

Judith Cook's portrait of Daphne du Maurier is an illuminating study of a complex & introverted woman whose books continue to captivate generations of readers.

Genres: Nonfiction, Biography

317 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1991

About the author

Judith Cook was a lecturer in theatre at the University of Exeter. She wrote several mysteries based on the casebooks of Dr Simon Forman, an Elizabethan doctor and astrologer.

Reviews

[Carol, She's so Novel ꧁꧂ · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5★

Quite simply, one of the best biographies I've ever read!

Not without flaws and I'll get those out of the way first.

📚 The biggest for me (And Cook isn't the only literary biographer who does this) was the spoiler filled summaries of D du M's books. Fortunately I realised very quickly that Cook was going to do this with every...single...book and skipped over them. While I am keen to read The Loving Spirit, the following two novels sound dire and I'm highly unlikely to attempt them, so I'm not to worried about having read their synopsis.

📚 The book is unbalanced, in the sense that there was was a lot about D du M's (fascinating) ancestors, family & early life, but not so much about her life from when she became famous. This is because D du M herself wrote biographies, about members of her family & she reluctantly wrote an autobiography (the wonderfully titled Growing Pains) but she was always clear that she wanted her private life from when she married "Tommy" Browning to remain private.

📚 The bibliography is very short. & some of the books (like the works about the Oliviers) are only marginally important. There are omissions in the indexing ( I was frustrated to find Cousin Geoffrey missing) & a minor mistake in the bibliography of D du M's own works.

But Cook is helped by having a brief acquaintance with the Brownings in the 60s. Cook visited D du M's beloved Menabilly & she did a dramatisation of The King's GeneralSo she knew their personalities, but doesn't try to make the relationship closer than it was. & she doesn't state as fact some details that the Scottish legal system would regard as "not proven." The main example of this is Daphne's famed father, the actor Gerald du Maurier's obsessive love for his middle daughter? Even what Cook recounts (& a photograph she includes of Gerald looking adoringly at his adult daughter & holding her hand ) she leaves the reader to draw their own conclusions. With Daphne's second cousin, actor Geoffrey du Maurier, Cook is more explicit. I wish I could find a picture of Geoffrey online - so I could print it out & throw darts at it! At 26 & married he was flirting with 15 year old Daphne, which later progressed to kissing. He was undoubtedly grooming this young girl & I know, different time & country but I can't understand why the visibly jealous Gerald didn't ban him from the home.

Daphne's life was undoubtedly privileged -her father financially supported her and let her live separately from the family while she followed her dream. Her famous name opened doors for her. But those doors would have closed again if it wasn't for Jamaica Inn and then the phenomenal success of Rebecca(still one of my all time favourite books, although My Cousin Rachel runs it very close)

It is clear that Menabilly (the near ruined manor she leased & lovingly restored) was the love of D du M's life. Losing both Menabilly & her husband Tommy very close together sent D du M into a deep depression. Her frugality & eccentricity became more pronounced & this book has me wondering if D du M was suffering from dementia.

More than worth your time if you are looking for a Daphne biography that isn't sensationalist.

Recommended

https://wordpress.com/view/carolshess...

[Helen]

Daphne du Maurier's background was privileged and wealthy, her father a noted actor, her grandfather the author of Trilby, which features the original Svengali. Daphne's first three novels were, according to Cook (I haven't read them), very flawed. Cook suggests it's unlikely Daphne would have had such an easy time getting her work published if it hadn't been for the du Maurier name. At at any rate, Daphne's fourth novel was the thrilling Jamaica Inn, followed by the classic Rebecca. Du Maurier is too often dismissed as a writer of 'romances' - from what I've read of her fiction, only Frenchman's Creek is total froth (but still enjoyable). She herself made the point that she was a story-teller rather than a writer - she had no illusions that her work was high art.

Cook's biography is pretty basic, particularly compared with Margaret Forster's later biography, but provides a good introduction to the life and work of du Maurier. Cook is essentially a fan of Daphne's work, but does make the point that 'a hagiography would do her a disservice', and isn't afraid to be honest (i.e. negative) about du Maurier's less successful works.

One thing that does stand out is du Maurier's strangely intense relationship with her father, a theme that recurred in her fiction. Although Cook doesn't suggest that the relationship was incestuous, she does think that Daphne was in love with her father. 'What happened to Daphne was that she was deeply in love with her father, her emotional life was really entirely tied up with him...', according to writer and friend AL Rowse. Cook's evidence suggests that du Maurier wasn't a highly sexed person, her happy marriage being more companionable than passionate. In an essay, Daphne wrote that what people seek during lovemaking is 'basic peace and reunion within ourselves'. Her comment that 'Incest being denied us, we must make do with second best' referred to du Maurier's interpretation of incest as meaning 'the emotional quest for the father, brother, sister - the perfect 'other'...'

Cook's critiques of du Maurier's novels are workmanlike, but I'm newly inspired to re-read My Cousin Rachel, and seek out The Scapegoat, The House on the Strand, and the semi-fictional work The Glass-blowers. Cook tells us that du Maurier hated most of the screen adaptations of her fiction, with the exceptions of Don't Look Now and Hitchcock's Rebecca. However, she disliked Hitchcock's version of The Birds, particularly the fact that he set it in America rather than in Cornwall. About Rebecca, Cook quotes du Maurier as saying that she deliberately didn't give her narrator a name - 'I did mean to intrigue people, and it was so much easier writing in the first person but I have to admit, I never did have one in mind.' [July 2004]

[Shiloh · Rating 5 out of 5]

The descriptions and language is superb. It read like a classical novel and was a joy to read. The detail of Ms Du Maurier's life was interesting, honest and facinating, without a hint of disrespect or deliberate slander.

[Mandy Partridge · Rating 4 out of 5]

Judith Cook has written a fine biography of Daphne Du Maurier, but does fill the biography with spoilers for all her novels.

Du Maurier lived a life of privilege, but she clearly observed working class and criminal class people, and represented their lives and concerns very realistically. Daphne depicts sociopathic tendencies in both her leading men, as in'Rebecca', and in the smugglers of 'Jamaica Inn', and contrasts these evil characters with innocent but intelligent female protagonists.
Trustworthiness is another theme Du Maurier explores, and her characters from the ruling class, priesthood, working and criminal classes show a surprising amount of dishonesty and scheming.

It's a pity that Cook didn't explore the possible reasons for this, besides vague accusations of incest. Cook notes that Du Maurier didn't appear to be very passionate about her husband or children, and the reader is left wondering why. Was hubby a philanderer? Did she just marry for convenience or appearances? There seems more to Daphne's hopes, fears and motivations that the biographer could find.