The Perfect Nanny

Chapters 19 through 31 examine Louise’s past and her present in greater detail. Past hardships in Louise’s life may have contributed to her unhealthy state of mind. The reader learns about her abusive husband, Jacques; about her financial troubles; and about the fact that she almost had an abortion when she was pregnant with Stéphanie. Most significantly, the reader learns that Louise was previously diagnosed with a mental health condition during her stay at the Henri-Mondor hospital: “delirious melancholia” (155).

The narrative tension also builds with increasingly uncomfortable moments in the present as Louise’s interactions with the Massé family become more strained. The moment when the tax office contacts the Massé household—when Louise’s personal hardships are thrust into Paul and Myriam’s faces—is climactic. There are also smaller, more intimate “breaking points” between Louise and Mila, Paul, and Myriam. The breaking point with Mila comes in the park, when the nanny and Mila physically harm one another and mutually, silently agree to keep it a secret.

That secrecy becomes sinister when Myriam discovers bite marks on Adam when giving him a bath. It’s heavily implied that Louise could be responsible: She bites her nails multiple times throughout the book, and in the next chapter, Hector Rouvier—a child formerly under Louise’s care—recalls Louise’s “biting” kisses. Louise, however, blames Mila. She betrays Mila’s trust by telling Myriam about Mila’s biting, even though she and Mila have an unspoken agreement. Louise manipulates Myriam into keeping the secret, asking her not to tell Mila because it would harm “the bond of trust” between Louise and Mila (121). It’s a duplicitous approach, ensnaring multiple people into a web of secrecy.

The bite marks themselves symbolize the growing tension in the Massé household. At first, the misunderstandings were small and easy to bypass. However, the incidents of friction are becoming more serious and explosive. The tension is coming to the surface, as visible as a bite mark. This is clear when Paul raises his voice at Myriam about putting makeup on Mila and making her “as ugly as a circus freak” (101). He is dissatisfied with Myriam’s response; she neither appears contrite nor apologizes.

While Louise’s character becomes increasingly sinister, Paul’s character becomes increasingly distasteful. Paul has a very generous view of himself; while reflecting on his discomfort around Louise, he recalls how “[h]is parents had raised him to detest money and power, and to have a slightly mawkish respect for those ‘below’ him” (118). Yet he actively leans into the unequal power dynamic between himself and Louise. His irritation at Louise’s lack of contrition following the makeup incident affirms Paul’s power-hungry attitude. In Paul’s mind, it’s unforgivable that Louise doesn’t play the part of the “good help,” acting docile and servile. He can’t forgive her for her subtle challenge to the power dynamic he relishes. Paul also openly displays his sexist viewpoint with his assertion that heavy makeup is “vulgar” and implies promiscuity—and, notably, not something he will ever permit for his own daughter.

Paul treats Louise as if she were beneath him—as if she were an object. This attitude toward domestic workers is seen even more distinctly in a character from Louise’s past, Mr. Franck, a man who essentially tries to force her into getting an abortion. He treats her as if he owns her, saying she’s “completely irresponsible” for even considering having a child (105). This kind of dehumanizing experience is another piece of the puzzle suggesting why Louise might eventually behave violently.

These power dynamics shown through Louise’s interactions with various characters—Paul, Mr. Franck, Jacques—are informed by both socioeconomic inequalities and sexism. Paul and Mr. Franck have a socioeconomic advantage. Meanwhile, even debt-ridden and jobless Jacques manages to assert his authority over Louise with his sexist and racist critique of her work: “I’m not a doormat, a slave content to clean up the shit and puke of little brats. Only black women do work like that now” (94).

Chapter 22 introduces the counterpoint to Louise: Wafa. Wafa is a different kind of “perfect nanny.” She is not the cleanest or the most responsible or the most educated. She’s not even legally in France. However, Wafa checks many of the boxes of the stereoptypicalf nanny: she’s an immigrant and a woman of color. She doesn’t have the “haughty airs” or “grande dame pose” of Louise (197). Wafa is and will continue be Louise’s only friend. It even seems at one point that Wafa might be able to help Louise; Wafa offers her friendship and sets Louise up with a potential romantic partner, Hervé. However, these possible sources of aid come too late and can’t prevent the impending tragedy.

This series of chapters also provides a brief exploration of fatherhood, rare for a book that focuses primarily on questions of motherhood. Paul’s views on fatherhood and Myriam’s views on motherhood are surprisingly similar. Both of them find it difficult to be needed to the extent that a child needs its parents. Where Myriam thinks that “[w]e will, all of us, only be happy […] when we don’t need one another anymore. When we can live a life of our own, a life that belongs to us, that has nothing to do with anyone else” (38), Paul feels that that “[h]is passions had grown tepid, His world had shrunk” (117). Although they never openly discuss it, both Paul and Myriam struggle with needing and being needed. The pressure of being needed by their children is too much. At the same time, they desperately need Louise—and eventually resent her for this need. Myriam, who technically needs Louise more, tries harder to push past this resentment. Paul, however, leans into it.

Just as Louise has moments of reckoning with Mila and Paul, she also has a moment of reckoning with Myriam in these chapters. The chicken carcass on the kitchen counter at the end of Chapter 31 is the symbolic equivalent of Myriam refusing to bow her head and apologize to Paul. Myriam has asked Louise not to feed the children old food; Myriam threw the carcass away for a reason. Louise’s insistence on digging it out of the trash and flaunting what she did by leaving the carcass on the kitchen counter is another subtle challenge to the power hierarchy that Myriam and Paul are so desperately trying to cling to—even though that power hierarchy is already shaky thanks to their need for Myriam.

Through this incident, Louise also begins to grasp more explicitly for control over the children. Feeding them old meat, not a fresh meal, is one way Louise maintains the minimal power she has as her position in the household continues to destabilize. The fact that Louise encourages the children to eat old chicken also speaks to her growing disregard for their well-being. Old chicken, especially when taken out of the garbage, would likely be full of bacteria, possibly dangerous bacteria like salmonella. Louise either doesn’t consider this fact or doesn’t care when she encourages the children to eat the old meat.