web
counter
 

rosemarydadf.jpg
100 Books in One Year: Rosemary’s Baby by Ira Levin

Cannonball Read / Robert

Book Reviews | March 4, 2009 | Comments (17)


I’m not even going to try to hide it: Rosemary’s Baby is one of my favorite novels of all time. I place it up on that literary pedestal with Hard Times by Dickens and The Sound and the Fury by Faulkner. I consider it the greatest horror novel ever written and one of the crown jewels of American literature. Ira Levin is so underrated as an author I can’t even find a dry or witty comment to express my disdain for his lack of public image.

For those who don’t know, Rosemary’s Baby, the novel, is exactly the same as the book. That’s because even Roman Polanski realized you can’t improve on perfection. His screen adaptation takes all of its cues from the novel, down to exact lines of dialogue and specific set and costume designs. A handful of changes were made, and obviously there are omissions when dealing with a 300-plus page novel, but the results are nearly imperceptible.

When Guy and Rosemary Woodhouse move into a new apartment building, it looks like their every dream will come true. They finally get pregnant, and Guy begins catching one break after the other in his professional acting career. Even the neighbors, as old and strange as they are, seem to embrace them and their success. Too bad that nice girl Rosemary met in the laundry room had to go and jump off the building, shattering the peace and serenity of their new lives and casting doubt on everyone Rosemary is connected to.

The novel excels in many ways. For one thing, it’s the rare suspense novel that does not play down to the reader. The reader only knows what Rosemary knows, and that’s exactly the way Levin wants it. Are their hints earlier in the book as to what happens at the end? Not particularly. Maybe some flags that you notice on a second or third read, but nothing that overtly says “And it all ends like this.” The fact that a novel that continually betrays your expectations manages to stay a compelling read is remarkable.

The characters are interesting and well developed. From the Castavettes, the freaky deaky elderly neighbors with no shortage of pre-natal advice and convenient contacts for the Woodhouses, to Dr. Hutch, Rosemary’s old, trusted doctor who tries to warn the young couple from staying in an apartment complex with such a checkered past. Rosemary, for all of the strange occurrences in her pregnancy, comes across as level headed, rational, compelling, and sane, even when everyone has convinced her she’s losing her mind. She feels real, even when pursuing the wildest theories in really strange ways.

Then there are the descriptions. Levin does not leave a detail untyped that needs to be shown. You know exactly what the apartment looks like before anything important happens there. You’ll see the detail of the necklace Minnie gives to Rosemary before Rosemary even acknowledges its existence. And all these minute details do nothing to distract from the story. They enhance it. We know what Rosemary knows, and that’s how Levin wants it.

The pacing in the novel is phenomenal. It flies by without feeling rushed. It’s a slow burn suspense/horror novel without the halting sense of pushing a boulder up a hill only to watch it run away at the last second and leave you hanging.

I know I’ve had a few run-ins with people in the past who believe me to be a horrible person for praising this book so much. After all, it can be interpreted as pretty abusive to women. Some claim my fascination with raped by the devil stories clouds my judgment, while others use that as signs that I’m a complete misogynist and should be ashamed of myself. And I could care less.

Lesson learned: my taste in literature is exactly that: my taste. Just because I love Faulkner doesn’t mean I won’t be mocked mercilessly by my peers for appreciating his layered fiction. And just because I enjoy Rosemary’s Baby doesn’t mean I’m a horrible person for reading what happens to poor, victimized Rosemary. It also doesn’t mean that this type of feminist reading is even an accurate reflection of the text. There’s a certain reputation to the book, and certain scenes that always come up in conversation. Those certainly are capable of clouding judgment when viewed as isolated moments.

For me, it’s easily one of the best ever written. I strongly recommend it to anyone who has never picked up the book or seen the film. The two work hand in hand.

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. Details are here and the participants and their blogs are here. And check here for more of Robert’s reviews.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Rape A Love Story Bello Jackson | Guest of Cindy Sherman Trailer









Comments

For those who don't know, Rosemary's Baby, the novel, is exactly the same as the book.

A wonderful lesson in synonyms, Robert. Thanks!

Seriously, though: nice write-up.

Posted by: Sean at March 4, 2009 9:23 AM

Nicely said, Robert. And, honestly, pretty much anything can be interpreted as abusive to women, if someone tries hard enough. Though I always thought that was one of the motifs of the story- the definition of a "woman's role" in the late 1960s, and the resistance of everyone around her to her attempts to be a modern woman. But, a well-written novel is a well-written novel, period.

I haven't read this book in ... oh, hundreds of years. The movie, however, I watch not infrequently. I love it to pieces. And I agree, it's definitely one of the best novel-to-film translations out there.

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at March 4, 2009 9:34 AM

Good review, Robert. It gave me a good feel of the book, and makes me want to read the hell out of it.

For this, the Spambots will spare you...for now.

Posted by: Mike R. at March 4, 2009 9:38 AM

Hard Times? Really? It wasn't bad, but Louisa's denouement with her father sure happened hella fast.

Posted by: twig at March 4, 2009 9:43 AM

I bet these are the same feminists who say the Stepford Wives is a misogynist book because it shows "perfect" housewives as the ideal...

Posted by: Kat at March 4, 2009 10:16 AM

Well fuck me.

For those who don't know, Rosemary's Baby, the novel, is exactly the same as the book.

A wonderful lesson in synonyms, Robert. Thanks!

I can't have just one thing posted on this site without a type, can I? Same as film, obviously.

This is why I hate trying to play catchup on blog entries: I get sloppy. And I'm still backlogged by about 10 or 12 books.

Posted by: Robert at March 4, 2009 10:23 AM

If anything, I interpret RB as a pretty feminist story in that it validates Rosemary's conspiracy theories about dudes. Suspect your husband is in cahoots with your neighbors, the gynecologist, and Satan? He is! Suspect something's up with your pregnancy? There is! Same with The Stepford Wives.

Posted by: samantha t at March 4, 2009 11:04 AM

I can't have just one thing posted on this site without a type, can I? Same as film, obviously

Guess not.

Posted by: Drake at March 4, 2009 11:34 AM

This is also one of my favorite reads, along with another Levin classic "This Perfect Day".I always wondered why no one ever made a movie of it, great dystopian story, and we all love those!

Posted by: Brite at March 4, 2009 11:49 AM

As much as I love this book, and its faithfulness to the original novel, I prefer A Kiss Before Dying among Levin's work. Then again, you really can't go wrong with any of his stuff...

Little known fact, or maybe lotta known fact: the film follows so closely to the novel because it was Polanski's first foray into adapting another person's work. So he was constantly calling up Levin for the exact date of a newspaper that's being read, or what edition a certain ad appears. Polanski didn't know any better.

Posted by: David at March 4, 2009 11:59 AM

I heartily second your review, and I also shamefacedly admit that I kinda loved "Son of Rosemary," too.

Posted by: The Pink Hulk at March 4, 2009 12:36 PM

I always thought Rosemary's Baby and the Stepford Wives did a good job of explaining why feminism was necessary. Levin grew up in a time when women couldn't open a bank account without their husband's permission, couldn't rent an apartment without putting down their father as a reference, got fired for getting pregnant, had to put the date of their last period on their job applications, and when they went out to eat were given menus with no prices (since it was the man's job to pay and all). Pre-feminism America was a lot like those Mid Eastern countries westerners like to make fun of. Levin realized that the amount of control husbands had over their wives was truly scary and there wasn't much to stop an evil husband from harming his wife.

Posted by: Inaras at March 4, 2009 1:18 PM

Enjoyable book, yes; paragon of American lit, debatable.

Either way, I can't take your opinion of literary merit seriously with so many typos and grammatical inconsistencies in your writing. Maybe that makes me a snob. I don't know; I couldn't care less.

(Because, you know, I could care less, but that would mean I'm capable of caring less, which, obviously, I'm not.)

Posted by: Ariel at March 4, 2009 10:24 PM

"Some claim my fascination with raped by the devil stories clouds my judgment, while others use that as signs that I'm a complete misogynist and should be ashamed of myself. And I could care less."

Just plain ugh, to both sentences.

Posted by: Al at March 4, 2009 11:45 PM

Um the phrase 'I could care less' is sarcasm, not a mistake.
Maybe there is a question as to whether is should be used in writing when there are no cues available from the tone of the voice, but I think this phrase is so well known that the meaning is clear.

Posted by: ChrisD at March 5, 2009 5:48 AM

No, the phrase is much maligned, not well-known. If one says, "I could care less," what they actually mean is, "I couldn't care less," regardless of tone. It's grammatically incorrect, and quite frankly, just silly to try to argue that it's one's use of wit which makes it correct. If you're going to blow someone off, at least do it intelligently.

Posted by: Ariel at March 5, 2009 4:47 PM

I hope that if Ariel's local stations try to warn her of an impending disaster, they use perfect grammar and sentence structure. Otherwise, she'll sit there and die out of pure, shrewish spite.

Posted by: Craig at March 6, 2009 1:28 PM