Rate this book

The House On The Strand (2013)

by Daphne du Maurier(Favorite Author)

3.87 of 5 Votes: 4

ISBN

0316252999 (ISBN13: 9780316252997)

languge

English

genre

Historical Fiction

publisher

Little, Brown and Company

review 1: I'm thinking of writing another time slip novel and debating how to do the time travelling (the first novel had parallel stories)and a friend suggested this book. It's the only du Maurier novel I haven't read and it surprised me by being quite different. I don't think the idea of an hallucinogenic drug is likely to work in a fiction of today, but I still enjoyed the novel. The fourteenth century characters and setting were very vivid, particularly that part of Cornwall that du Maurier does so well. I found the relationships between the characters and the location of each of the houses confusing at times but the intrigues, the romance and the sheer brutality of the era were extremely well evoked. The book hasn't solved my problem but I'm glad I rea... mored it!
review 2: Had Rebecca not been the first Du Maurier book I had read, I'd probably have packed it in with her after this book. This was probably the most disappointed I've ever been reading a book. I had such high expectations and they really didn't live up to them. Was it my fault for having such expectations? Perhaps. I just thought this book had such a great premise. I suppose I should have caught on when I found that it wasn't received as well. I'm personally a sucker for time travel (be it in film or book). The problem I often find however, is that you end up being drawn into one world and frustrated by the other. You want more from one and less from the other. I think that's what impresses me so much about time travel; if an author can captivate an audience in both, then I think that's quite an accomplishment. Unfortunately, as with most books of this genre, I found the same problem. Funnily enough I was far more interested in his actual life than the one he was entering into. I just had no interest in the world that he was captivated by. I don't know...perhaps this book just wasn't for me or perhaps that was intended. Maybe Du Maurier wanted to create an alternate reality that wasn't all that wonderful in order to highlight the frustrations Dick was feeling in his own life. I suppose it implies that it can take something so little for him to feel as if he's escaped his mundane existence. I don't know. If not, then I really don't understand. Surely she should be making us want to fall in love with this century just as he does? Unless she doesn't want us to have sympathy for this character. I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW. The characters. That's another thing. I found them exasperating, unsympathetic, dull and frankly painful. It got to the point where I really had to will myself to continue the book. I just found it frankly absurd that someone who appeared to have a strange sort of affinity with his so called 'old friend' could act so nonchalant and insensitive about his death. I felt no attachment. No grief. While I don't enjoy endless amounts of 'poor me, pity me', it would have been nice to see some sort of emotion. Then for him to continue, basically showing complete disrespect for his friend, just frankly pissed me off. Again, perhaps Du Maurier wanted to portray him as such a character. Perhaps she was highlighting who a person becomes when they step into the world of the addict...insensitive, numb and completely and utterly infuriating. The only character that was remotely appealing was Magnus but we didn't see near enough of him. WHO KNOWS and frankly who cares. I'm sure I could sit for hours and try and analyse what the hell she was trying to do with this book but in all honesty...I don't care enough to bother.For all its bloody annoying qualities though, I will give it this. If a book is meant to stir emotions in its reader, then it certainly did that. At least I felt something and at least it made me think. I guess I'm just someone that needs to sympathise and care about the characters, especially when it's first person. less

Download links for: The House on the Strand

Advertising

Online stores:

Amazon

Copy in the library:

Find

Torrents:

Find

Links:

Reviews (see all)

bri

It's such a pity that writers go out of fashion, then few people read them. I was introduced to Daphne DuMaurier as a young teenager (by my very British mother), and I enjoyed her work. If you don't know, DuMaurier was an English writer from the 40s, 50s and 60s, who was a master storyteller and wrote some important books, including Rebecca (which was adapted into a movie and won an Oscar in 1941), and the original novelette The Birds, which Alfred Hitchcock later adapted into his famous movie. Wiki says she was never considered an intellectual heavyweight because she didn't write about angry young men (like Sinclair Lewis, say), which was in favour at the time.Anyway, why did I pick up The House on the Strand after reading it 35 years ago as a young teenager? Because I wanted to compare it to Outlander, by Diana Gabaldon. After all the hype that franchise is getting, I wanted to compare Gabaldon to an earlier writer, DuMaurier, in the same genre. The House on the Strand and Outlander are similar in plot: time travel stories intertwined with a time-bending love story. The main difference is that DuMaurier's character is a man, Richard, and travels back and forth in time after taking an addictive hallucinogen concocted by his genius Professor friend, Magnus. In Outlander, of course, the heroine is stuck in the past with her lover in the 1760s, there is no back and forth in time.If I had to choose which book I preferred, it would be DuMaurier's The House on the Strand. The landscape, Cornwall in the 1960s/1300s, is lovingly described and very, very real. Richard is a great Jekyll/Hyde character, truly a man of the 60s caught in a nightmare of hallucination and drug addiction, and love of a woman he can never attain. The historical story is fascinating too, and the horror story aspects are quite chilling, DuMaurier nails the terror and disturbing aspects of reality/non reality and the quick-changes between times are very well done. Although I enjoyed Outlander, (I've reviewed it on Goodreads), I think DuMaurier's story is the better of the two, and I also think DuMaurier is the better writer. If you enjoy historical fiction, and you liked Outlander, you may want to give an earlier writer a try, and discover (or rediscover) an early entry into the horror/time travel/paranormal genre.

Fmramos

I actually hated the medieval time sequences, which were a good chunk of the book... The two characters who experienced them were supposed to be infatuated with their plot and characters, and I could not relate. But I still had to give this maximum rating because I was more transported by it than any other piece of fiction I've read recently. There was this sense of anticipation throughout for what seemed like an inevitable deliciously tragic ending. Also, I think most people can relate to the theme of escapism from a mundane life, but what's even better is the main character's relationship with his family. I read the wiki plot summary after I finished the book, it said that he does not truly love them. I don't think that's exactly it. I think he feels about them the way anyone transiently feels about people they love when those people become momentarily inconvenient... Like when you're trying to hide and indulge a drug addiction. Or like, on a Tuesday, when you're sleep deprived and burned out and wish you could just play video games.

crice221

great ghost story

Write review