Henry James' novella The Turn of the Screw relies a great deal on ambiguity. As we discussed in class, whether or not the ghosts are "real" is unclear throughout the story. Other events (such as the final scene, the children's intentions, Miles' expulsion from school, etc.) are equally ambiguous. With that in mind, write a few paragraphs addressing the following questions:
1. How did you interpret the events in the story? Do you think the ghosts were "real" or were they a figment of the governess' imagination? Were Miles and Flora innocent children or was their innocence and goodness just a ruse? Support your readings with textual evidence.
2. Why, in your opinion, did James create such an ambiguous story? How does the ambiguity serve the overall purpose and ideology of the narrative?
comments for this post have been closed
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
As I read and re-read the last sentence of The Turn of the Screw, I grew confused and somewhat frustrated. I thought to myself, is this really it? It’s over just like that? There were so many questions I still had left unanswered. When I first began reading the book, I went along with the narration by the governess and completely believed her stories of seeing the ghosts and them wanting to take the children from her. However, after our discussions in class regarding the extreme ambiguity of the story, I became skeptical as to whether or not these ghost sightings, in fact, existed. While reading further on into the book, I tried to make sense of whether or not the governess had her full sanity intact. And although we discussed that all this chaos could just be the governess going mad, I do believe that she truly saw Peter Quint and Miss Jessel. However, I’m not sure that the two ghosts were visible to the other characters in the story at first. I think that once the governess first saw the two apparitions, her mind began to run wild with thoughts of why they were there and what they wanted. Because of these troubling and conflicting thoughts, some of her theories about the ghosts were exaggerated and thought up in her own head without any evidence. For example, when the governess first saw Miss Jessel, she immediately came to the conclusion that the ghost wanted to capture Flora, and these thoughts caused the governess to fear for the children and devise a plan to save them.
In addition to the governess exaggerating the intentions of the ghosts, I think the governess caused herself to believe the children were evil when they did not admit to her that they had seen the ghosts. Throughout the story, the governess both coyly and outwardly pleaded with Miles and Flora for them to tell her about seeing Peter Quint and Miss Jessel and to explain what they wanted and why they continuously appeared at Bly. The more innocent and oblivious the children acted, the more flustered the governess became. Because the governess so adamantly believed in the childrens’ knowledge of the ghosts’ existence, she thought that the children were hiding evidence and explanations from her, thereby proclaiming them evil. For example, as the governess continued to theorize about the ghosts’ relationships with the children, she conveyed to Mrs. Grose that the childrens’ more than earthly beauty, their absolutely unnatural goodness was a game. She declared it policy and fraud. (p.47) I think that had the children openly admitted to the existence of Peter Quint and Miss Jessel, the governess would be even more in love with the children, and there would be no evidence in the story of the children possessing any wicked traits.
I believe that in making this novella ambiguous, Henry James emphasized the horror in the story. As we have learned from previous readings, the unknown or dark elements contribute to the frightening tone or feel. James wrote in a way that caused the readers to have to choose what to believe was happening. He never included blunt evidence supporting that the ghosts in the story actually existed. And if they did exist, there was no reason as to why the governess believed that Peter Quint and Miss Jessel were after the children. I think that the ambiguity enables the readers to interpret the story in a variety of ways. This freedom of thought and interpretation contributes to the overall purpose of the narrative by connecting horror with imagination. Depending on what the reader is willing to believe, the events in the story can seem more eerie and frightening, or the readers may choose to believe that the governess has gone mad and thereby eliminate the true horror in the tale.
The Turn of the Screw is more than just a ghost story. I think in a lot of ways it’s a discussion of how people in different societal classes interact with one another. Because the themes Henry James brought to light in this novella could not be stated explicitly, he used various literary devices instead. The first tool he used was that of the unreliable narrator. The entire story, with the exception of the prologue, is told from the governess’ perspective. Each event is skewed by however the governess might have been feeling at the time the event took place. Her first encounter with a ghost is when she is out daydreaming. This leads the reader to question whether or not she really saw a ghost at all. When the other characters in the story identify the ghosts as Peter Quint and Miss Jessel, the ghosts gain credibility as well the governess. I believe the children in the story, particularly Miles, are just that, children. Whether or not they’re truly innocent is a different story however. It seems that they start acting differently after a little while due to boredom. That’s relatively normal for young kids. But the change in Miles’ speech and the manner in which he addresses the governess are a for James’ voice to come through his characters. Miles is meant to represent the budding new addition to the highest class of society during this time period. It may also be a reflection of what he had done at his school to get kicked out in the first place. As stated before, James’ motive in this story was to reflect upon the structure of the society in England at the time. The use of people in different classes set in an isolated setting where they are all forced to interact works more or less as a thought-experiment. It seems James’ was interested in how each class would maintain its boundaries in such a situation. The ambiguity of the story allows the reader to draw his or her own conclusions. Most of the issues this story brings to light were also highly controversial as well, hence the lack of explicit detail concerning Quint and Jessel’s affair, the master, and Mrs. Grose’s personal life. In this sense, James’ used the various ambiguous aspects of the story to get across his message without drawing too much attention to the controversial underlying message and he succeeded in doing so.
Sara Hashem
The ambiguity of the Turn of the Screw is where I think the horror element arises. Not that the ambiguity itself is horrific, but more of what the reader creates in their minds is fantastic. James’s horror comes from the reader’s imagination, because I think that the reader themselves adds the horror that is expected. The book is considered a horror novella, so this ambiguity affect is fitting. From the epilogue it attempts to set the story up as a typical horror story with Douglas and the story he finds so horrifying. Even though I never felt like the horror ever reached what I expected, the beginning of the novella was much creepier than passing halfway through the book because of my expectation. This also goes for the ending, where it is not clear what really happens, however left to reader interpretation it can be a real horror to what happens to Miles. I read the events of the book at first as if it were real. I absolutely believe that Peter Quint’s ghost had appeared at least once. Why? Simply that at that point in the book, there was not a reason to mistrust the governess, since she did not even know of the character Peter Quint. However, as the story progressed it became salient that the narrator was not a reliable. This becomes very apparent with the ghost of Miss Jessel. I see progressing madness of the governess as the plot. She seems crazy because of her assertions of ghosts’ wants and identity. Also Mrs. Grose never sees the ghosts (page 70), which adds to the assumption that the governess is mad. On page 71, Flora doesn’t want to ever see her again, because of the governess’s craziness. As for the final scene of the book, I read it as her madness had grown to such a level that she began to see Miles as Peter, and attacked “Peter” only to kill Miles by accident. I assert this because of the last phrase about “his little heart,” because the governess’s tone and choice of wording pointed towards it being Miles.
While reading The Turn of the Screw, you are hearing the first hand experiences of the governess. The governess was put in charge of two “angelic” children, Miles and Flora. While the governess is fulfilling her role of caretaker, she begins to see two apparitions, Peter Quint and Miss Jessel. The governess immediately jumps to the conclusion that the ghosts are seeking to corrupt the children, especially after she learns of the inappropriate affair between Quint and Miss Jessel. The governess soon takes the role of “child savior” as she now feels she needs to protect the children from the ghosts. Oddly in the book, the only characters that claim to see the ghosts is the governess, raising the question as if they were real or only in her imagination. I believe that the governess really did see the ghosts as she could vividly describe their physical characteristics as well as their emotional state. I feel that the children, especially Miles were not innocent. Miles exhibited some type of negative behavior that caused him to be expelled from school. He also had a “creepy” vibe that was manifested in the fact that he was mature beyond his years and he acknowledged that he could do bad things. Flora was portrayed as being very innocent and young and her behavior was not typical of a child. She was too good to be true, which causes me to believe that she was not as innocent as she was portrayed to be.
I feel that Henry James was ambiguous because he wanted the reader to examine and reflect upon their own belief systems regarding good and evil. In addition he wanted to show that outward appearances can cause deception regarding a person’s true self. The ambiguity allows the reader to determine what they want to believe regarding the governess, the ghosts and the children.
Kelli Covington
When I read “The Turn of the Screw”, I never consider it a ghost story. Nor do I believe that the Governess sees ghosts. My reason could just be that I do not believe in ghosts. However, even if I did, I would still feel the same way because the Governess is just an over-protective woman who is way in head over heels in love with the Master. The reason I think that’s important is because she doesn’t want to disappoint him, so she begins to imagine things to make her feel like she’s doing her job. Watching over ‘her’ kids, that is. After all, why does she automatically jump to the conclusions that the children are seeing the ghosts from random acts they perform and that the ghosts are after the kids in the first place? The book provides no real evidence that they’re ghost sightings besides the Governess’. The children never gave any reason to show that they were anything but innocent. Besides the time where Miles talked back to the Governess, and got kicked out of school, they never act up. Miles, like most children, may have just been repeating behavior exhibited by his father or his uncle. The ambiguity within the story was so apparent because in a time period where everything was so regimented and people knew their place, it served to blur that line. There was no ambiguity during that time period and the opposition of the two helped create the mystery that we dub this as a ‘horror story’. It seemed like defiance on James’ part to keep things unclear and let the readers discover their own meanings which is unconventional.
Henry James wrote his Turn of the Screw story as one of mystery. The main issue with this is that the mystery is not in the supposed haunting of set of children of the estate of a family, but whether the mind of the children’s governess is haunted or not. This entire novel is set up and shrouded in ambiguity. Even the ending leaves us without definitive proof of a haunting or not. I feel Henry James does something many readers are not able to do, leave it up to the reader to decide. This causes the reader to examine his own ethos and morals in deciding many of the key issues of this story. Because of the time period this story was written in. many parts, including sexuality, could not be so blatantly announced or discussed on (both heterosexuality and homosexuality).
I believe that the ghosts in this story were figments of the governesses imagination. This allows for Henry James to not get a “ghost” story out of his novel but also he can explore a psychological component as well, allowing him to explore more depth as a writer. As far as the issue as to whether the children were innocent or terrors, it is in my belief that Flora was innocent, albeit a brat, and Miles was a misfit child, most likely in my mind a homosexual. Henry James does this for many reasons in my opinion. He makes Flora appear to be a naughty child- yet in reality is innocent in order to add more layers to the ambiguity to this novel. Miles’ sexual orientation is not just a subvert commentary on homosexuality in Victorian times, but on sexuality in that era.
James presents a story to us that gives us the options of filling in the blank. Instead of just giving us a novel we read accept, and are more likely than not soon to forget, one will remember Turn of the Screw because it caused me to have to put serious thought into that undertones of the novel.
-Ben Farias
Henry James writes The Turn of the Screw in an ambiguous way to let the reader be the one that judges if the narrator/governess of the story is sane or not. James allows and encourages both interpretations of the governess, for James made the governess into a two sided character. From the prologues “you will easily judge her” it is believed that the audience will have to be the one that judges her. This allows two different opinions as to whether or not the ghosts are real and if children are “angels” or “devils”.
I believe that both the governess is sane, yet another part of me believes that she is insane. If the ghosts are real and the governess sane than she does a good job in trying to defend the children and rids Miles of his demon. What makes me believe that the Miles sees the ghost is the fact that he blurts out “Peter Quint, you devil!” and it is inferred that he is terrified to see Quint himself. The reason for his death then becomes what the governess believes with is that he has been dispossessed, and it has lead to his death. On the other hand I also do believe that the governess could be insane and she is seeing imaginary ghosts. This might cause her to be the one that makes Miles and Flora become ill leading one to death. Miles reaction of “Peter Quint, you devil!” might only prove that he knows that the governess believes that he sees Quint. However, what he says doesn’t exactly prove that Miles has seen Quint. Although I may hold both opinions for the governess’ sanity and the appearance of the ghosts I believe that the children were not innocent. Miles is always secretive as to why he was expelled from school and both children can’t be as perfect as they seem. That is why Henry James’ ambiguity aids in the audiences mind wandering to believe what they want to believe.
Karen Esquives
From beginning to end this novel has seemed in a way, pointless and unrealistic in my opinion. First of all, the way the governess responds to seeing the ghosts is unusual. She says how she is not scared of the ghosts, only that they will harm the children. I would be scared, and I believe most others would feel the same! There is also the skepticism surrounding these “perfect” children and the possibility of her being mad that is totally left up for debate! Finally, the worst part of the book is the finale!! Miles speaks about the ghosts and then just dies! WHAT?!?! I suppose you can interpret this to be him being dispossessed but I relate that to the exorcism or similar stories in which the demons are released but those people survive. I literally got to the end of the book and said to myself, is that really it? I flipped pages hoping to find more text to answer all the questions I had left. Henry James writes this book with so much ambiguity and I personally don’t understand why. It leaves the book up to the interpretation of the readers. For example, with the ghosts being real or not? I believe the ghosts were real and the children were seeing them all along too but did not want to admit to it. However, I am not sure if this is the right conclusion and that bothers me. I think writing with this ambiguous style was helpful in instilling fear in the readers throughout the novel, but a horrible way to end the story. When I was reading I was always on my toes waiting for something horrible to happen and in constant suspense. However, when I got to the most suspenseful moment I was left with many unanswered questions, leaving me frustrated and unsatisfied with book.
First of all this story doesn’t come off as a ghost story, especially with the evidence at the end that the children and Mrs. Grose never see the ghosts. As a result, I interprete the ghosts to be a figment of the governess’ imagination. The children at the end make it clear (to me anyway) that they don’t see the ghosts. The governess’ insistence at the end of the story when she is talking to Flora at the lake, frightens Flora to the point that Mrs. Grose has to take her away from Bly. Flora becomes scared and no longer stand to be with the governess for fear of her insistence and over protection. Also, Miles is baffled by the governess’ accusations of the ghosts at the end becomes upset, leading him to pass out and die. I think that they really were innocent children. The governess sees them as evil or bad due to the way that they react to her overbearing nature and lack of other children to play with. They don’t act badly aside from going out at night or playing little tricks. The children simply do this to get away from the governess and to create their own amusement. The time period’s standard for the behavior of children makes their simple misbehaviors out to be evil notions in the mind of the governess.
I see James’ ambiguity as a selling point and a way to keep himself from being forgotten among other writers. So many people analyze the story which it keeps the story in production and at the demand of readers. The ambiguity serves to give the story the overall semi-chaotic feeling from the absence of the father figure as well as the feminine fragility of the governess. The ambiguity also gives the reader a view governess’ mind as a failing tool and backs up the lack of her strength as a witness.
I agree with other students that the story was a disappointment and that it didn't seem like a ghost story to me. Ending with no horrible act occuring and the children not seeing the ghosts keeps me from seeing it as a ghost story. It was just an ambiguous work of fiction that I would only have enjoyed if I lived in the time it was written, I'm sure.
At first, I thought the ghosts may be real, however the governess constantly seems to jump to conclusions out of thin air and she also seemed pretty complacent in all that she said about herself. For example, on Pg. 27, she goes on about her to-be-performed heroic act of saving the children that “many another girl might have failed.” She does this several times in the book whenever she relates the stories to Mrs. Grose. She always makes herself out to be the stronger one out of two, although the housekeeper has been there for years longer than she has. Mrs. Grose even knows more about things past that the governess likes to speculate about. All these little things turned me off the governess and made me think maybe she was just silly.
I think Miles and Flora were innocent children that may have been abused by the former governess and Peter Quint, especially Miles. For example, Flora never admits to seeing the ghosts and the governess only jumps to the conclusion that she is playing harder just to distract her from seeing the ghost. But at most, this is a very far-fetched idea. However, the way Miles starts speaking in the middle of the novella is very creepy because it sounds like a much older man coming out of a 10 year old. In my opinion, Miles could have learned to speak this way by observing the way Peter Quint may have spoken to Miss Jessel. Also, at the end of the novella, I saw the governess as going mad and sort of attacking Miles in order to get the “truth” out of him. In my opinion, Miles may have been abused by Peter Quint, and having the governess refer to Quint being at the manor made him freak out. He either called the governess the “devil” for going so crazy at him or he referred to Quint because he was abused by him. I think Miles could have died from fright in thinking that Quint was back again, or the governess scared him so much, he died.
Being that Henry James made the governess an unreliable narrator, we will never really know what happened for sure. The story may have been so ambiguous in order to let the reader think it out and give the reader all the possibilities of events that could have occurred. The horror arises out of the ambiguity because the reader uses his or her imagination to see what could or could not be happening. Also, at the time that this book was written, the idea of horror was much more limited than what we have today. These days, kids grow up watching Scooby Doo become desensitized to the idea of ghosts, so we go into other dimensions such as horror in a hospital surgery room. Back then, there was a time and place for everything in a rigid society. This kind of uncertainty and doubt introduced to the society must have been shocking and horrifying to them. Either way, the ambiguity in The Turn of the Screw has led it to become highly discussed even a century after it first came out.
Henry James’ Turn of the Screw is a very ambiguous story, often leaving the reader making his/her own interpretations about what the events included in it actually mean. Having finished the book, I am quite confused myself but my interpretations lead me to believe that the governess was actually seeing Ghosts at Bly and that the children, though not entirely evil, were somewhat corrupt. The fact that there truly are ghosts at Bly is made clear, in my opinion, by the fact that Mrs. Grose recognized the governess’ descriptions of them as former workers at the estate. It is made much more ambiguous when Mrs. Grose fails to see Miss Jessel in the field on the night when she and the governess cross the lake together to find Flora. However, she tells the governess the next morning that she did hear things, which implies that Miss Jessel’s Ghost was real. The subject of the children’s corruption, however, is much more ambiguous throughout the book. Their seeming perfection at the beginning is so unusual that one could only be skeptical of its legitimacy. As the story progresses, Miles’ perfection in interacting with the governess gets to be of a nearly sarcastic and mocking tone, especially when he proved he could do something bad just to emphasize how good of a child he is all other times. James hints at the children having been corrupted by their exposure to the relationship between Miss Jessel and Peter Quint and, through all his ambiguity. I think that he expresses their corruption by these characters and knowledge of their existence of ghosts in the way they each react individually when the governess mentions or points them out. When she does this in Flora’s presence, the girl freaks out and refuses to see or speak to the governess for the remainder of the story. When she does it in Miles’ presence, he reacts less drastically but still seems to change his manner entirely, at a time when he is opening up and the governess is almost convinced of his innocence.
In reading this story, one is likely to anxiously await the time at which everything ties together and all the answers are set out on the table only to come to the last few lines and have them be some of the most ambiguous yet. This ending, with no real closure, shows that James intended for a very ambiguous story. I assume that he wrote with such ambiguity to require the reader to make his/her own interpretations. Such a style almost engages the reader more in the story because he/she has to act as if he/she were in the position of the narrator (or possibly another character) and trying to figure out what was really happening. This story is very much about the repression of feelings or interactions and by making events in the story ambiguous, James represses their meaning in a way, and requires the reader to find meaning in their ambiguity.
Personally, I don’t think the ghosts were real. I think the governess has some background issues that caused her to fabricate stories and make herself believe she was seeing certain things. For example, whenever she would tell Mrs. Grose stories about who/what she saw, if she notices Mrs. Grose was becoming intrigued or scared she would become more dramatic in telling the story. If the governess was at all in her right mind when she saw these “ghosts” she would be scared or even close her eyes but instead she chose to ‘stare them down’ and memorize their clothing articles. I do not think Miles and Flora were pretending not to see ghosts, there simply were no ghost to be seen.
In response to the question asking whether Miles and Flora were truly innocent, I think they were innocent of not being evil. The pranks they pulled and odd behavior they exhibited were just signs of normal children in my opinion. I think of them like all other kids wanting to trick their babysitter because that is who the governess was. In addition, I think Miles just wanted attention from his uncle. When he would misbehave, he asked the governess if his uncle knew how he was acting. She responded that his uncle didn’t even know, and although that line was underplayed in the story, I feel as if that brief conversation between the two of them demonstrated Miles purpose for acting strange. He was a little boy with no role model and no one to tell him ‘good job son’ or to teach him the simple things a father passes along to his soon. Flora was OK because she could relate to the governess and the housekeeper but Miles was unsure how a boy should behave and I don’t think he is to fault for his ‘odd’ behavior.
Although I am not an avid reader, horror connoisseur, or 1900’s book fanatic, I firmly believe that the ambiguity in this book was partially on purpose and partially a happy mistake. Again, I’m not very familiar with horror and suspense in the 1800’s, but I find it hard to believe that the ‘feeling’ of suspense was well defined and even less developed as a tactic in writing. The ambiguity in this story (to me) is likely a solid first stab at what we today call suspense. Not knowing so much in this book causes a feeling of emptiness, which today with modern suspense and horror competing we can quickly dismiss as a terrible book. I believe that the governess is crazy, and that the children are too, and that the author most likely was as well, but any feeling that I may have and whatever support I may be able to provide would prove relatively useless judging by the fact that people who know a whole ton more about literature that I do are still arguing about it. I think that it’s just safe to say that it was much easier for James to write the book in this manner because not only does it allow for readers to fill in the plot line but it allows for the only feeling this book provides. Looking beyond the feeling of suspense and ambiguity, I feel absolutely nothing coming from the pages of this book. The fact that there is little to no other emotion (if you can call this ‘suspense’ emotion…) in this book anywhere tells me that the reader is purposely led to realize the emptiness and the holes left in this story. It seems to me that James was heading down the road of developing the predecessor to the modern ghost story, but he didn’t know quite how to do what he had envisioned, so he just left stuff out, creating the emptiness that would puzzle readers for centuries.
At the beginning of the story, I was convinced that the governess was accurate and that she was actually seeing ghosts. The way in which she described the children and her situation seemed eerie and Bly appeared to be a likely setting for a ghost story. Strange happenings seemed as though they were not out of the ordinary there.
Since the author gave us no reason to doubt the trustworthiness and sanity of the governess as a sole narrator, I believed that everything she reported was true. If she said that Flora saw Miss Jessel across the lake and so took the little boat to get to her, I believed that this was true. But none of the other characters ever made any mention of seeing ghosts, not Mrs. Grouse, Flora, or Miles. This seems very odd to me because if a child of 8 or 10 years old saw the ghost of someone that they had known in life, and knew had died, the child would be frightened and tell a trusted adult immediately. A typical child would cry, be afraid of the place they saw the ghost, and look for reassurance, none of which Miles or Flora ever do. They act as if nothing is wrong, probably because they do not see the ghosts. Towards the end is when I stopped believing in the governess. The moment when she and Mrs. Grouse catch Flora across the lake and see Miss Jessel on the other side is when I stopped trusting in the governess’s sanity: “[…] during which Mrs. Grouse’s dazed blink across to where I pointed struck me as a sovereign sign that she too at last saw, […]. (James 70).” Mrs. Grouse’s “dazed blink” does not convince me that she actually saw anything unusual, and certainly not a ghost. Once again, this is not the appropriate reaction to seeing the ghost of a dead person. Flora also does not apparently see the ghost of Miss Jessel: “To see her [Flora], without a convulsion of her small pink face, not even feign to glance in the direction of the prodigy I announced [the ghost of Miss Jessel], but only, instead of that, turn at me […]. (James 70).” Neither of these statements of the governess’s prove to me that either Mrs. Grouse or Flora saw the ghost. I believe that Miles and Flora were truly innocent children and it was the governess who was “seeing” the ghosts.
James most likely created such ambiguity to add to the mystery of his story. If everything was clearly defined throughout and all loose ends wrapped up at the close, the psychological horror would not be nearly as acute as it is. In this way he is successful in leaving his readers thinking about his implications. Also, he achieved literary immortality because people are still pondering and discussing the meaning of his story all this time after it was written and published.
The Turn of the Screw is a complex ghost story that seems to contain more ambiguity than clarity. I had a difficult time depicting the difference between the reality of the story and the imagination of the governess. I do not believe that the ghosts were real in the story; however, I do feel that there is a certain “air” about the house that leads new guests to different states of sanity. It seems to me that the governess took her job a little too seriously and took here caretaking for the children too far. This is what led her to seeing ghosts and imagining that they were out to get her. Her jealousy and lack of confidence led her to a weak state of emotions. I will be the first to admit that I am a bit suspect of the innocence of the children. When the children were caught out of bed in the middle of the night I had my doubts about their purity. This dishonor has stemmed from past events that went on with the previous staff causing the children to have psychological damage and emotional duress. I believe that the ambiguity was where most of the horror came from in this story. If everything was set in stone, I would have a difficult time imagining things that were a lot more disturbing that they actually were. In my humble opinion, I believe that in literature an open end can be much more frightening than a concrete plot.
Carlos Rodriguez
18-1
Without the six page prelude of ghost stories being told around a fire, reading The Turn of the Screw could be read as a woman’s descent into madness. Although Douglass never claims it to be an unnatural tale, a story concerning a loved one losing their grasp on reality could qualify as “uncanny ugliness and horror and pain” (2). Under this premise, the innocence of the children can be debated due to an unreliable narrator. Miles’ actions at night, breaking the rules of the house, can be explained by a child’s boredom from being sequestered in a remote mansion after being in an engaging environment with his peers (46). The governess’ visions of ghost can be explained through an overactive imagination (Chapter XIII). The first ghost sighting the governess has is a man at a large distance in the night (16). The next vision happens after a long stormy day, where boredom can influence imagination, the governess sees Quint again and vanishes within seconds of her pursuit (19). The following sighting occurs at the lake where she views Miss Jessel, the fact can be argued if she actually saw Miss Jessel or not from her misconstrued description of the late governess as a figure of “unmistakable horror and evil” (30). The governess’ madness is also illustrated through her reading into the actions of the children. For example, when Miles looked up from the lawn not directly at her but above her to another supposed presence on the tower, understood to be one of the ghosts (43). When she reads Flora’s ‘marked’ interest with creating a boat to play with in the lake as an avoidance of viewing Miss Jessel is another instance (29). And the scene walking to church in Chapter XIV was seen by the narrator as Miles gaining an advantage through knowledge could be more seen as a child emulating his father figure and fulfilling his societal role (54). Several reasons could explain James intent on keeping the story ambiguous. For one, to make the story more popular, to create discussions on or to create ‘replay’ value to reread the book to catch elements you have missed. The ambiguous nature also serves as a device driving the reader to plod through the diction to attempt to discern whether the governess is actually seeing ghosts or is insane.
Post a Comment