I stumbled upon a movie version of The Scapegoat by Daphne du Maurier a few years ago and was fascinated by the story. So, of course, I got a copy of the book, which I hadn't read when I watched the movie, and it sat on my shelf until the GoodReads True Book Talk group read it in March.
Once again, Dame Daphne didn't let me down. The Scapegoat was a classic DMM thriller. Basic story is that a boring British academician (John) whose specialty is French history meets his doppelganger, a roguish French count (Jean), in a bar and Jean tricks John into changing places with him. Very much a Prince and the Pauper story that Mark Twain played around with, and Dickens had a go at in A Tale of Two Cities.
In The Scapegoat, Jean has made an utter mess of his life, his family business is going under, his daughter is flighty and quasi-suicidal, his sister is a religious fanatic who hasn't spoken to him for 20 years, his mother is a morphine addict, his brother hates him...you get the picture. He tricks John into being his scapegoat - assuming his identity so he can disappear without causing a manhunt. John also feels he has made a mess of his life and is headed to a monastery to try to find a reason for living.
 |
| Matthew Rhys played John and Johnny in the British movie based on the novel. |
Incredibly, John is able to step into Jean's shoes--they are identical, and John's French is perfect. It was fun to read about how he managed to figure out all the various threads of Jean's life, and wonderful to see how he was able to mend the family and the business. John is definitely the hero of the story.
The book and the movie differed most in the ending, although the movie is set in England not France, and Jean became Johnny. The book turned out to be very positive and life-affirming. The movie version took a much darker tack. I ended up rewatching the movie after finishing the book and really wonder why the film makers choose to go dark instead of light with their version.
The Scapegoat was first published in 1957, making it one of DMM's later works. It was tightly written, really interesting, especially since WWII and the French occupation and resistance is still very fresh in people's lives, and well worth reading.
This novel is part of my Classics Club first 50--I'm closing in on getting this challenge done this year!
Great review. I really want to read this book NOW. :D And I have a copy. Maybe I will use it for the Classic From a Place You've Lived for the Back to the Classics Challenge since I did my junior year abroad in college in France.
ReplyDeleteI loved this book when I first read it as a teenager and was disappointed by the TV film version, set in England when I watched it years later. I wonder if the earlier film with Alec Guinness as John would be better?
ReplyDeleteI didn’t know there was an earlier film version. I can totally see Alec Guinness as Jean/John.
DeleteI like the sound of this one...both the book and the movie! :)
ReplyDeleteJane, How fascinating! I had no clue what this one of Du Maurier's was about, and hence never picked it up. Thanks so much for inspiring me for another DDM read!
ReplyDeleteExcellent review! I had no idea what this was about, but it sounds like a great read. Will make it my next Du Maurier novel.
ReplyDeleteMy wife has read a few Daphne du Maurier books. She is a bit of a fan. Both the novel and film sound good. I am actually surprised that I have never seen the film. I will at least try to catch that.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the great review on this one. I'm going to get hold of it. I love du Maurier's work, but haven't read The Scapegoat. And I do love a good doppelganger story :)
ReplyDeleteGreat review, Jane. I guess I didn't view the ending of the book as light because I'm not a religious person so I didn't really see that as a win for John. I think John learned optimism and a larger sense of self-confidence when he stepped into Jean's shoes so he could have went back to his old life a happier man, if Jean had not wrecked it all for him. I guess that's what made me so mad. In all though, the book was great, but I did like the movie ending better.
ReplyDeleteFor me, it seemed that John fixed Jean's life so that Jean could have another shot at making his life work. In the process of living Jean's life for awhile, John learned that he is lovable, capable, and I saw his resumption of his plan to go to the monastery to consider "what next" to be affirming. Earlier, before he met Jean, he was going to see if life was worth living. Now he is going to have time to meditate on how to take what he learned and reshape his habits as John. Religion really has nothing to do with it. For both men, they were able to take a break from their lives and see what else might be possible other than the destructive grooves in which they were grinding down.
DeleteInteresting about Matthew Rhys playing John. I will have to look around & see if I can find that movie. Filling in for one's doppelganger seems like a great plot.
ReplyDelete