The Perfect Nanny

These three chapters distinctly escalate the narrative tension. First, the testimony of Rose Grinberg in Chapter 16 makes it clear to the reader that Louise’s attempt to die by suicide, depicted in the introduction, was unsuccessful. Again, while the introduction immediately revealed the book’s climax, it doesn’t address the why of Louise’s actions—her motivation for killing Adam and Mila remains forever unexplained. The entire book is an exploration of the various factors that led to Louise killing the children, and these chapters start to hint more definitively at those factors.

The trial, depicted through Rose’s testimony, also shows the characters in the story grappling with this troubling question. Why, they wonder, would “the perfect nanny” turn and kill the children in her care? When Rose is on the stand, the lawyer asks her if Louise appeared drunk when Rose saw her on the afternoon of the murders (Rose replies that she was definitely sober) (80). Alcohol isn’t to blame for Louise’s altered state of mind. Instead, these chapters unpack some of the other reasons that may have caused Louise to behave violently.

First, in Rose’s testimony, there is a direct reference to Louise’s financial troubles: “Louise had revealed that she had money problems, debts she’d accumulated, and that her landlord was harassing for failure to pay the rent” (82). So far, it’s only been made clear that Louise isn’t wealthy through the reference to her shabby apartment in the suburbs of Paris. This is the first time that the reader learns about her debts (which, the book will reveal, she inherited from her dead husband, Jacques).

Second, there is the fact that Louise’s day-to-day existence beyond the Massé family is quite bleak. This becomes apparent in Chapter 17, when she returns from a beautiful holiday in Greece to her shabby studio apartment. While most people look forward to having time off work, “Louise really hates weekends” (86). Louise is so obliging about sleeping over at the Massés’ and working long hours because it’s preferable to her own empty life.

Louise has nobody in her personal life. There is nobody to care for, nobody seeking her time and attention. For Paul and Myriam, this is partly what makes her “the perfect nanny”. Myriam’s friend Emma affirms this early in book, when she tells Myriam to look for a nanny without children or, “If she has children, it’d be better if they’re back in her homeland” (5). The expectation that the “perfect nanny” shouldn’t have a life of her own is sobering, and speaks to the deeply-embedded classism in middle and upper-class perspectives on caregivers. It’s dehumanizing, denying a person basic life needs, like a social network and personal support system.

A solid support network and social connections have been shown to contribute to good mental health. Louise is lacking this component in her life. This also raises another point hinted at in these chapters—the fact that Louise has a history of mental health conditions. She got her apartment “through a nurse in the Henri-Mondor hospital who became fond of her” (84). It’s the first reference to Louise’s past hospital stay, when she was diagnosed with “delirious melancholia” (155).

These chapters also foreshadow the grotesque events to come. When Louise takes the children to the park, a typically innocent image of kids playing leaves becomes sinister with diction like “dead leaves” and “blood red” (90). Further foreshadowing is seen in the overtly violent incident between Louise and Mila in the park, when Louise hugs Mila so tightly that Mila bites her (92).

Finally, Louise’s trial, as seen in Rose’s testimony, addresses another prominent theme carried throughout the book—motherhood and the expectations society places on mothers. Louise’s defense lawyer puts Myriam on trial (metaphorically speaking) for choosing a career over being a stay-at-home mom: “The lawyer had portrayed Myriam as an ‘absent mother,’ an ‘abusive employer.’ […] selfish and indifferent to the point where she pushed poor Louise too far” (81). The lawyer casts judgment on Myriam for daring to have ambition. The fact that Paul doesn’t have such expectations thrust upon him speaks to the unfair standards imposed on women when it comes to childcare.