What's so cutting about this line in "Rebecca"?
November 8, 2024 2:54 PM Subscribe
In an early scene from Daphne du Maurier's "Rebecca", Mr. de Winter appears to have used the allusion of an old English king, Ethelred the Unready to put down a shameless social-climber, Mrs. Van Hopper, but his meaning is sadly lost on me. Could you explain what he meant?
The exchange happened like this in the book:
She turned to me by way of explanation. “Mr. de Winter is so modest he won’t admit to it, but I believe that lovely home of his has been in his family’s possession since the Conquest. They say that minstrels’ gallery is a gem. I suppose your ancestors often entertained royalty at Manderley, Mr. de Winter?”
This was more than I had hitherto endured, even from her, but the swift lash of his reply was unexpected. “Not since Ethelred,” he said, “the one who was called Unready. In fact, it was while staying with my family that the name was given him. He was invariably late for dinner.”
She deserved it, of course, and I waited for her change of face, but incredible as it may seem his words were lost on her, and I was left to writhe in her stead, feeling like a child that had been smacked.
Was he implying that Mrs. Van Hopper was like the unready king, late for everything?
Or was he implying that she was like the Norman conquerors and thus unwelcome?
Or was he saying that those royal visits happened so long ago that it was of no account?
-- These all seem very far-fetched and mild-sounding, instead of something mean-spirited that the first-person protagonist grasped immediately.
Help?
The exchange happened like this in the book:
She turned to me by way of explanation. “Mr. de Winter is so modest he won’t admit to it, but I believe that lovely home of his has been in his family’s possession since the Conquest. They say that minstrels’ gallery is a gem. I suppose your ancestors often entertained royalty at Manderley, Mr. de Winter?”
This was more than I had hitherto endured, even from her, but the swift lash of his reply was unexpected. “Not since Ethelred,” he said, “the one who was called Unready. In fact, it was while staying with my family that the name was given him. He was invariably late for dinner.”
She deserved it, of course, and I waited for her change of face, but incredible as it may seem his words were lost on her, and I was left to writhe in her stead, feeling like a child that had been smacked.
Was he implying that Mrs. Van Hopper was like the unready king, late for everything?
Or was he implying that she was like the Norman conquerors and thus unwelcome?
Or was he saying that those royal visits happened so long ago that it was of no account?
-- These all seem very far-fetched and mild-sounding, instead of something mean-spirited that the first-person protagonist grasped immediately.
Help?
Best answer: He was making fun of her. Ethelred the Unready got his name from an old English word "unræd" meaning "poorly advised". So Max de Winter was mocking Mrs Van Hopper's ignorance that she'd have no idea about this and that she'd assume his story was true. The protagonist, of course, realised this was a joke at Mrs Van Hopper's expense, and felt bad for her.
posted by essexjan at 3:08 PM on November 8 [1 favorite]
posted by essexjan at 3:08 PM on November 8 [1 favorite]
I think he's just sort of blowing her off with a ridiculous historical allusion.
Ethelred was a notably weak king, who reigned for a surprisingly long time considering how much the Danes kicked him around. His reign was about 50-75 years ahead of William the Conqueror, so it's not a reference to that. I think there's kind of a glib use of the name "Unready," which actually had nothing to do with his readiness but rather it means "bad council" which is a play on his name "wise council." Whether Mr. Winter knew that or not, I do not know. It's possible he's showing that he does not care to be accurate or maybe that he's also kind of an idiot.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:08 PM on November 8 [1 favorite]
Ethelred was a notably weak king, who reigned for a surprisingly long time considering how much the Danes kicked him around. His reign was about 50-75 years ahead of William the Conqueror, so it's not a reference to that. I think there's kind of a glib use of the name "Unready," which actually had nothing to do with his readiness but rather it means "bad council" which is a play on his name "wise council." Whether Mr. Winter knew that or not, I do not know. It's possible he's showing that he does not care to be accurate or maybe that he's also kind of an idiot.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:08 PM on November 8 [1 favorite]
Best answer: It’s an elaborate piece of sarcasm- imagine it was something like “oh yeah, we used to entertain Peter the Great - actually he got that name here because he was such a great houseguest.” It’s silly and meant to indirectly push back on the other speaker’s statement.
posted by showbiz_liz at 3:16 PM on November 8 [11 favorites]
posted by showbiz_liz at 3:16 PM on November 8 [11 favorites]
Adding on to showbiz_liz, the phrase "late for dinner" is meant to sound especially silly, basically the phrase is a punchline whose tone of mundane comedy deflates her lofty pretensions.
posted by ojocaliente at 3:52 PM on November 8 [3 favorites]
posted by ojocaliente at 3:52 PM on November 8 [3 favorites]
Response by poster: Thank you all, I knew I could count on you guys for knowing your ways around solid sarcasm!
posted by of strange foe at 6:04 PM on November 8
posted by of strange foe at 6:04 PM on November 8
I haven’t read Rebecca, though I have a general idea of its storyline, but that rejoinder about Aethelred seems extremely boorish to me, and I would have been far more embarrassed for de Winter over his mistreatment of poor, ignorant Mrs Van Hopper, who was after all his guest, with the manifold obligations that status places on him, than I would have been for her.
I couldn’t say whether du Maurier wanted to convey her protagonist’s blindness to de Winter's lack of character, but I think I might have been at least as confused as you were.
posted by jamjam at 7:07 PM on November 8
I couldn’t say whether du Maurier wanted to convey her protagonist’s blindness to de Winter's lack of character, but I think I might have been at least as confused as you were.
posted by jamjam at 7:07 PM on November 8
jamjam, she's not his guest, and since you haven't read the book how about refraining?
posted by theatro at 5:29 AM on November 9 [6 favorites]
posted by theatro at 5:29 AM on November 9 [6 favorites]
jamjam, this isn't Emma mocking Miss Bates at the picnic on Box Hill. Mrs. Van Hopper is a snob and tbh is pretty vile toward the narrator and everyone else "beneath" her. She's a Hyacinth Bucket type. Even her name (like Hyacinth's) is a joke -- the "van" implying Old New York society matron like a Van Cortlandt, but followed by the extremely prosaic "Hopper."
That said, Max de Winter has a lot of issues of his own, and his cynical wit is meant to contrast with the narrator's total naivete. It's a great book, especially as we head into the dark time of year, well worth your time!
posted by basalganglia at 5:52 AM on November 9 [7 favorites]
That said, Max de Winter has a lot of issues of his own, and his cynical wit is meant to contrast with the narrator's total naivete. It's a great book, especially as we head into the dark time of year, well worth your time!
posted by basalganglia at 5:52 AM on November 9 [7 favorites]
She wasn't his guest. They were both on holiday in the same place and she was trying to make a snobbish alliance between the two of them and boost her own ego by placing Rebecca "below" and other to them. He didn't suffer fools or abide in petty niceties in any way, which is not about 21st century values but rather just part of the generic character of Romantic heroes, who "out" imposters to "real" class this way all the time. These guys don't have to play by the rules and are bored by the rules because they are the rules.
posted by ponie at 7:33 AM on November 9 [3 favorites]
posted by ponie at 7:33 AM on November 9 [3 favorites]
Sorry, I mean the narrator, NOT Rebecca! Quite the opposite.
posted by ponie at 7:39 AM on November 9 [2 favorites]
posted by ponie at 7:39 AM on November 9 [2 favorites]
Response by poster: @jamjam, for what it's worth, de Winter later sent a note to apologize to the narrator for the vicarious (yet still acute) embarrassment he caused her.
posted by of strange foe at 10:17 AM on November 9
posted by of strange foe at 10:17 AM on November 9
Keep in mind, the narrator of Rebecca has a lot of anxiety and takes things extremely personally. We can trust her depiction of events but not her interpretation of them.
The Ethelred comment is, in my view, a fairly mild clapback as Maxim tries to change the subject away from Manderley; it is the narrator's perspective that makes it out to be a massive insult.
Moving forward in the scene:
I think he realized my distress, for he leaned forward in his chair and spoke to me, his voice gentle, asking if I would have more coffee, and when I refused and shook my head I felt his eyes were still on me, puzzled, reflective. He was pondering my exact relationship to her, and wondering whether he must bracket us together in futility.
Maxim's behavior in the moment, as well as the note a few pages later that of strange foe mentioned, indicate that he indeed realized her distress; but what he was actually pondering is anyone's guess.
Finally, here's the note in question. Maxim doesn't necessarily understand why he has upset the future Mrs de Winter, but he does the polite thing and apologizes anyhow.
Someone knocked at the door, and the lift-boy came in with a note in his hand. "Madame is in the bedroom," I told him but he shook his head and said it was for me. I opened it, and found a single sheet of notepaper inside, with a few words written in an unfamiliar hand.
"Forgive me. I was very rude this afternoon." That was all. No signature, and no beginning. But my name was on the envelope, and spelt correctly, an unusual thing.
"Is there an answer?" asked the boy.
I looked up from the scrawled words. "No," I said. "No, there isn't any answer."
posted by What is E. T. short for? at 12:16 PM on November 9 [1 favorite]
The Ethelred comment is, in my view, a fairly mild clapback as Maxim tries to change the subject away from Manderley; it is the narrator's perspective that makes it out to be a massive insult.
Moving forward in the scene:
I think he realized my distress, for he leaned forward in his chair and spoke to me, his voice gentle, asking if I would have more coffee, and when I refused and shook my head I felt his eyes were still on me, puzzled, reflective. He was pondering my exact relationship to her, and wondering whether he must bracket us together in futility.
Maxim's behavior in the moment, as well as the note a few pages later that of strange foe mentioned, indicate that he indeed realized her distress; but what he was actually pondering is anyone's guess.
Finally, here's the note in question. Maxim doesn't necessarily understand why he has upset the future Mrs de Winter, but he does the polite thing and apologizes anyhow.
Someone knocked at the door, and the lift-boy came in with a note in his hand. "Madame is in the bedroom," I told him but he shook his head and said it was for me. I opened it, and found a single sheet of notepaper inside, with a few words written in an unfamiliar hand.
"Forgive me. I was very rude this afternoon." That was all. No signature, and no beginning. But my name was on the envelope, and spelt correctly, an unusual thing.
"Is there an answer?" asked the boy.
I looked up from the scrawled words. "No," I said. "No, there isn't any answer."
posted by What is E. T. short for? at 12:16 PM on November 9 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: @What is E. T. short for?, I love your take on this scene! It echoes what the narrator said earlier about the younger version of herself:
'One was too sensitive, too raw, there were thorns and pinpricks in so many words that in reality fell lightly on the air.'
posted by of strange foe at 3:23 PM on November 9 [1 favorite]
'One was too sensitive, too raw, there were thorns and pinpricks in so many words that in reality fell lightly on the air.'
posted by of strange foe at 3:23 PM on November 9 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
Mrs van Hopper trying to portray him and his stately home as having a lofty place among the aristocracy. His reply is so preposterous it makes her look like a fool.
"oh, you're from Washington DC? Have you met the President?"
"Yeah, I had tea with George Washington the other day. He'd just come from crossing the Delaware."
(Subtext: no of course I haven't met the f***ing President, you are a fool.)
posted by Pallas Athena at 3:06 PM on November 8 [13 favorites]