James' The Turn of the Screw and Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House are similar stories in many ways. They share similar protagonists, settings, and plot points. Both stories are about young women who move away from their family homes into haunted isolated estates.
Written over 60 years apart (1898 and 1959, respectively), the novels are written in very different styles. Discuss the writing styles of the two novels. Which novel was easier to read? Why? Consider elements such as sentence structure, page layout, amount of dialogue, etc. How much does an author's style influence your enjoyment and understanding of a novel?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
I found The Haunting of Hill House much easier to read than The Turn of the Screw for various reasons. Even though both novels are written from only one character’s point of view, The Haunting of Hill House contains much more dialogue and input from other characters. Eleanor is the main narrator, but Jackson includes lots of description of setting and dialogue, as well as Eleanor’s personal thoughts. But even these imaginative thoughts make sense for the most part because she is making creative stories up in her head. Also, we know Eleanor’s background, so I can usually tell when she is lying, whereas the governess was going crazy and it was much more difficult to extract the truth from her narration. With the governess as the only narrator in The Turn of the Screw I found the story very confusing because I began to doubt her reliability as a narrator as I was reading.
Also, the language that James uses is much more antiquated and not at all the way people speak or think today. He uses very long sentences and at times, parts of the story conflict with each other without any indication as to which part is true. Jackson uses more modern language for the speech and thoughts of her characters, which makes The Haunting of Hill House a much easier read. She also adds ominous scenes which make me think that something must happen soon, and keep me reading. James’ novel is a classic but even with all of the ghosts appearing, nothing climatic happens until the last sentence.
Even though I am not finished with The Haunting of Hill House yet, I am enjoying reading it more and I am able to better understand it than James’ The Turn of the Screw.
Out of the two novels we have read so far, I have found that The Haunting of Hill House is much easier and more enjoyable to read. The writing styles of Shirley Jackson and Henry James differ in many ways. For example, the vocabulary and word choice in each of the novels are very different. This is most likely due to the difference in time periods between the two books. James’ diction seems more proper and old-fashioned, which sometimes slowed my reading process and caused me to re-read sentences and paragraphs to assure my understanding of the story line. In addition to the language style, I found The Turn of the Screw more of a challenge to read because most of the story consisted of the governess reflecting on her experience at Bly. Because the story is written in first person, readers only learn the plot from the governess’ point of view, which may instigate skepticism within the reader. Many times while reading the book, I questioned whether or not the governess had her complete sanity intact and thereby questioned the accuracy of her stories. Contrastingly, The Haunting of Hill House is written in third person, and therefore readers get more of a well-rounded plot than a biased one. Also, there is much more dialogue between the characters, which makes a story more enjoyable for me to read, as opposed to simply reading reflections by one character. I also think that as a result of the dialogue in The Haunting of Hill House, the story progresses more quickly and more action seems to take place. I felt that because of the lack of dialogue in The Turn of the Screw, some parts of the book took longer to read and seemed to drag on and fail to ignite provide excitement or interest. I certainly believe that the author’s style contributes a great deal to my enjoyment of the story. I feel that I enjoy Jackson’s style most, with her use of common vocabulary and constant dialogue. It is a very enjoyable story to read and contains a plot filled with incessant action and excitement.
Shirley Jackson’s The Haunting of Hill House was easier for me to read than Turn of the Screw because of the more modern vocabulary and sentence structure used in the book. Turn of the Screw uses a lot more archaic words that aren’t used anymore and the sentences are very long, usually describing something. On the other hand, The Haunting of Hill House has more dialogue and the sentences do not run on as much. Since there was more dialogue, there seemed to be more happening at any one moment. The book is easier to read due to the shorter sentences and more modern vocabulary. Furthermore, although there seemed to be an ominous tone in both books, Jackson’s book seems more readable due to the fact that the reader can already feel that something is going to happen. On the other hand, Turn of the Screw hints at something horrible happening at Bly all the time and nothing even happens until the very last line of the book. Because the climax was the very last paragraph of the book, it was very disappointing because nothing really happened in the rest of the book, despite the unreliable narrator’s horror. Furthermore, I think Jackson’s book is more spooky or “horrifying” so far because it is set at a more modern time that the reader nowadays can understand. The idea of horror could definitely have changed between 1898 and 1959, meaning that the more modern book would relate more closely to what we have now as the idea of horror. Overall, ease of reading as well as how much I can relate to the novel affects my enjoyment and understanding of the book.
Blog 3:
In James’ The Turn of the Screw we are presented with a first person narrative written in the vernacular of the Victorian era. Long sentences, much head dialogue, and an increasingly unreliable narrator sets the modern day reader up for a story that is quite challenging to read. James’ style was one that, for the most part, conformed to the style of his time. Turn of the Screw was a groundbreaking read for the horror genre, most probably frightening those that read it over a hundred years ago. It is because of that time though that we lose appreciation and start feeling confusion at James’ novel. Then we are presented with Shirley Jackson’s horror masterpiece The Haunting of Hill House. This story written in 1959 much better suits the modern readers ideals for an entertaining and captivating read. Written in third person we are presented with a much broader scope of activity in the novel. Allowing for, in my opinion, better character development and a much richer plot. Having steady dialogue and multiple characters to develop allows already for much more dynamic read. Us, as the reader, are reassured of the factuality of the scenes presented to us in Jackson’s novel because of the third person point of view. While many novels take advantage of the blending of fantasy and reality into plot lines, American Psycho for example, I do not believe it was in James’ intentions to create such a “vibe” of gross horror and the loss of reality in his novel. James’ novel, filled with ambiguity and lack of dialogue might have been an enjoyable novel for many hundreds of years ago, but clearly because of the modern syntax and diction of Haunting of Hill House we are going to enjoy it more.
-Benjamin Farias
The Haunting of Hill House was much easier for me to read than The Turn of the Screw. Both have author’s unique way of writing portrays the time in which they wrote their works. Henry James has a more drawn out way of saying what he wishes. He writes the character’s dialogue in a way that makes it chopping to read. Sometimes I re-read what they were saying to each other, because depending on facial expressions the conversation could be taken a whole different way. James doesn’t spend much time describing characters in this manner, and therefore it leaves the reader wondering what exactly is going on or “how am I supposed to read this?” James also writes in the manner that people in the late 19th century would speak. Formality and talking indirectly about the topic was normal. The sentence structure also reflects on the time period. Sentences are long, drawn out, and choppy in general. Characters insert their subthoughts into their main conscious stream of talking or thinking, which is where most of the choppiness comes from. In The Haunting of Hill House the sentences are usually short and generally flow easily from one to another. In 21st century writing, most people come out and say what they are thinking, or at least they say something directly. The majority of people don’t make superfluous statements every time they open their mouths. This is the main reason The Haunting of Hill House was so much easier to read. Characters in the movie have the same or very, very similar speech patters as we do. Shirley Jackson gives us insight into their thoughts when the characters aren’t speaking, but nothing is curbed around. Dialogue and action in the book are written in a way that we understand best. She also uses main characters, besides Eleanor, to back up what Eleanor is telling us. This makes the story flow better because we know that things that are happening really are happening and aren’t the psychotic visions of the point of view character as in The Turn of the Screw.
The author’s writing styles definitely affected my easy in reading them and my enjoyment of the work. I much preferred The Haunting of Hill House since it was easier to read and there was more action. My understanding of what was happening in the book was also greater for Jackson’s piece because it was so contemporary in it style.
In my opinion, The Haunting of Hill House is a much easier read than The Turn of the Screw. The way Shirley Jackson sets up the perspective of the novel makes it much easier for the reader to judge between what’s real and what’s unreal. The events are spaced relatively evenly throughout the book so that the reader is not left with an entire chapter discussing how quiet and peaceful things have been. Also, in between significant events, such as when Eleanor arrives at Hill House and when she meets Theordora, Jackson fills the “empty space” with what Eleanor is thinking. She essentially opens a stream of consciousness for Eleanor in order to help move the plot along. This is important because it breaks up the straight story-telling perspective that is present in most of the book. This book is a stark contrast of Henry James’ novel in terms of style. Although the story is entirely presented in the first-person perspective, the real and the unreal become increasingly blurred. The Haunting of Hill House contains a lot more dialogue between the characters as well. This allows the plot to progress faster because the main character isn’t left to her own devices all the time. The governess in The Turn of the Screw often times jumped to conclusions without consulting any of the other characters. This has a lot to do with the unreliable narrator because if she had jumped to a different conclusion, the story might have turned out completely different. Finally, in terms of overall style, I prefer Jackson’s novel. The setup of the story and how they all meet each other is more interesting to me because every character is completely different. In James’ novel, the children more or less acted as one character and Mrs. Grose wasn’t even as relevant as the possible ghosts the governess was seeing. That being said, The Haunting of Hill House is a more interesting read for me.
Both The Turn of the Screw and The Haunting of Hill House have similar plot lines and main characters but are written in very different writing styles. I feel that The Haunting of Hill House is a much easier read because its writing style is modernized as The Turn of the Screw is written in an old-English style. It is easier and more enjoyable for me to read the Haunting of Hill House because I can relate to the words and expressions used where The Turn of the Screw’s words and expressions are very dated and can be hard to interpret. The Turn of the Screw uses more complicated language and sentence structure which often makes it difficult to relate to and comprehend. The Haunting of Hill House is written using a third person narrator and includes the dialogue and thoughts of the main character Elenor as well as some of the thoughts from the other main characters. In this book, the reader really experiences the emotions of all the characters while they are living together in Hill House. The Turn of the Screw is conveyed as the main characters first person account of events and the reader only obtains her feelings and thoughts of what is happening in the story. The Turn of the Screw was written by Henry James in a very ambiguous way which makes the story and meaning very hard to understand at times. While reading The Haunting of Hill House I feel that the histories of the characters as well as what they are experiencing are presented in a straightforward manner which makes it much easier to read and understand. Because of the more direct understandable style, I am enjoying reading The Haunting of Hill House much more than I did reading The Turn of the Screw.
Language evolves over time. This thought alone tells that The Haunting of Hill House will be an easier read than The Turn of the Screw. But what struck me was the degree of difficulty I had in reading The Turn of the Screw. They are called complex-compound sentences and Henry James uses them freely throughout his book. I would like to reference page 5 of The Turn of the Screw:
“It had all but been a great worry and, on his own part doubtless, a series of blunders, but he immensely pitied the poor chicks and had done all he could; had in particular sent them down to his other house, the proper place for them being of course the country, and kept them there, from the first, with the best people he could find to look after them, parting with his own servants to wait on them and going down himself, whenever he might, to see how they were doing.”
William Shatner couldn’t have said it better. For sentence 100 years old, it may have taken just as long to read aloud. I was confused when I read this, though it may have been a remarkable triumph of syntax in its day, a third grade teacher of the 1990’s would have given it a failing mark.
By comparison, Shirley Jackson’s writing is much easier to understand, but that’s not to say what she used was uneducated English. Her writing has more discourse involved, but that’s not what makes it easier to read, either. Since her time period is closer to ours, her grammar fits much easier into our own. When she uses complex noun phrases and verb phrases, it’s much more like our contemporary style which the average reader (me) can comprehend more easily. Also there are more recognizable objects in the story which allow us to identify more easily with the story. If you can relate the story to yourself in some way, you are more apt to understand and enjoy it.
Language has a tendency to decline in complexity. As time progresses, the rules that guard our language become less protected and these rules are bent and in some cases broken. Novel sayings and structures are created and used, and somewhere an English teacher cries. The language arguably is English in both books, but clearly separated by grammar rules that have changed over time.
-Charles Schilb
The time span that there is between when both of the novels were written, influenced greatly the way that the story was told and the amount of dialogue that was incorporated in each novel. The Haunting of Hill House was way much easier to read than The Turn of the Screw. The writing style of Henry James was much more complex than that of Shirley Jackson. The way Henry James wrote seemed more formal due to the fact that it was written at an earlier time and in England. At times the reading was a bit more complicated to understand causing me to have to re-read certain areas of the novel. James’ novel was also written in a first person manner by the governess who at times can possibly be biased and unreliable. Jackson’s novel was much more direct and was told in a third person perspective making the story at most times more understandable and less biased. The audience gets the story as a whole instead of bits and pieces which is what we got from the governess in The Turn of the Screw. The Haunting of Hill House also had more dialogue making the plot more understandable and easier to read. The dialogue helped advance the plot, present information, and develop characters by making each character have their own opinion, letting the reader be the one who creates their own perspective on what is going on instead of being told what to believe. In the novel The Turn of the Screw, the words were condensed to fit more in a page which at times threw me off since I had to go back and re-read; however The Haunting of Hill House had words more spread out and was just overall easier to comprehend. To me what has more action makes me enjoy reading it more. Jackson’s novel was more interesting to me for the plot was more exciting and a lot more action is seen early on in the novel instead of only towards the end like The Turn of the Screw.
Karen Esquives
“The Haunting of Hill House” is definitely easier to read by my standards for multiple reasons; the number one reason being the language style with which both books are written. “The Turn of the Screw” is written in very old and but proper English, whereas “The Haunting of Hill House” is written in today’s modern language. This makes “The Haunting of Hill House” easier not only to read but also to understand. The sentence structures are shorter and the details are clearer than in James novel. James sentence structures are lengthy and they often run together with no clarity as to where one stopped and the other began. His details are often obscured by the suspicion of his main character being a reliable source of information. Jackson’s main character, however, is rather level headed and we can clearly distinguish between what is really happening and what is not. Jackson’s implementation of a lot of dialogue also makes his book more interesting and lifelike. He makes it easier to relate to his characters by making them more realistic. James focuses more on the story and puts the reader on the sidelines as a bystander to what is going on in the story.
The layout of Jackson’s book is also more pleasing to the eye and mind than James’s. Jackson uses a larger font size and more spacing throughout the book. He also does the liberty of cutting each chapter into different sections, making it easier to sit through. James’s font is smaller and the page is full of text, with almost no spacing. The reader could easily lose their spot while reading this book. Jackson’s style of writing is overall easier to read and thus more enjoyable. James’s style was meant to be read during his time period and has thus lost its luster in the modern world, whereas, Jackson’s has adapted and became rather enjoyable to read.
Henry James’ The Turn of the Screw and Shirley Jackson’s The Haunting of Hill House are written in two very different styles that lend to different levels of understanding and amusement. The former was written from a first person point of view that is very personal and not too dramatic. With this style, James attempts to engage the reader by appealing to the narrator’s thoughts and emotions. The later, on the other hand, writes from a third person point of view so, while still delving a bit into what certain characters are thinking, it deals more with telling stories about the character and what is happening in the book. This writing style, and the more extensive use of dialogue, make Jackson’s book easier to read than James’.
Certain technical aspects of the book’s writing and layout make it easier to read and become engaged in as well. The sentence structure with which Jackson writes, for example, is much less complex than that with which James writes. The pages in The Haunting of Hill House are laid out much more loosely than those in The Turn of the Screw, with smaller pages, and many fewer words per page. An element so simple as this has a surprising influence on one’s ability to become engaged in the story. Finally, Jackson’s book is easier to read because of the more extensive use of dialogue. This is an element that seems more friendly and inviting to the reader, as it allows for him/her to become more engaged in the events of the story.
I think that an author’s style is very important in determining a reader’s enjoyment in a novel. I like to believe that I will like any novel that is truly a good one but I think that, in the moment, any story is more enjoyable, and especially more captivating, should it be written in such a style that makes it easy and desirable to read.
The difference in reading these two stories is as obvious to me as night and day. The Turn of the Screw was as slow reading and boring as a book could possibly be to me, which I attribute to both the time period that the book was written in and the fact that James probably wanted to write the most aggravating book ever. I think he was successful. From the wordy and often backward (from a modern perspective) sentence structure to the choppy and clumped up interesting parts, the Turn of the Screw left me uninterested and unsatisfied. The Haunting of Hill House contrasts sharply in so many ways, they become difficult to mention. The action of the plot is spread out much better, so as to actually capture the attention of a reader, and the author actually takes the time to give detailed and accurate descriptions that provide the readers with feelings and clues of how to understand situations. This makes the book much more exciting to read for me. Granted, it takes more to get me to open a book compared to most people, but especially when put up against the The Turn of the Screw, The Haunting of Hill House is a pleasure to read.
The Turn of the Screw and The Haunting of Hill House, although very similar stories in plot, differ greatly when it comes to their style. The Turn of the Screw is written entirely from the governess’s point of view leaving it susceptible to criticism because there is a possibility she is going crazy. It became very difficult to distinguish between reality and the lies while reading Turn of The Screw because of this narration and the lack of reliability in the narrator. In the Haunting of Hill House the narration comes mostly from Eleanor but there is a lot of dialogue between the characters making it easier to read, more interesting, and believable. In addition to the narration, the page layout and sentence structure made the Haunting of Hill House and much more enjoyable novel. The chapters were easier to read because the sentences were mostly dialogue with small bouts of plain narration. The page layout of The Turn of the Screw was harder to read because every page was so dense with text since the novel was condensed to be smaller and shorter. These two novels had many similarities in their plots but The Haunting of Hill House is a more exciting novel and is much easier to read and understand because of its structure. After comparing these two novels it really became apparent how much influence the authors style can have on the enjoyment of the book. I personally found The Turn of the Screw very dull and boring to read. Although The Haunting of Hill House is a related story, I am truly enjoying the book and finding it difficult to even put it down.
I found, as most did, the Haunting of Hill House much easier to read. Not only the larger font helped, but overall, the style of Shirley Jackson’s writing was more enjoyable to read. In the Turn of the Screw the language was very ambiguous and certain keywords that expressed opinion seemed to be merely tossed in the jargon. For instance, where the governess calls the children “little wretches” (page 51) then continues to say endearing statements about the children later. It was very hard to figure out at times what exactly was going on. I supposed it was this style because of the first person narration. Also, without this style it would have been hard to see how the governess could be deemed mad. Due to this point of view, it had a lot of the governess’s personal thoughts, and little dialogue, since everything was from a single point of view. In general, it was hard to keep up with the story at times because it was recorded so ambiguously. Dialogue was scarce and speaking usually had a specific purpose. For instance, Flora doesn’t speak at all in the book except when she demands to not see the governess. Also Miles, for a ten year old boy, calls the governess, “My Dear.” For the Haunting of Hill House, there are moments where it does enter the imaginative land of Eleanor. However, not the entire book is told by this perspective. Also the language is much more contemporary. It is a more familiar for me to read, thus I go through it and understand faster. Meanwhile, it may have taken multiple read through on certain parts in Turn of the Screw to understand what was happening. There is plenty of dialogue in the Haunting which also allows having an unbiased view of other characters. Overall, the pages are easier to read because of the font, size, and not having a huge chunk of text to meddle though. The difference in years when the two were written marks a salient difference between them.
In response to other entries, it seems there is a general consensus that the Haunting of Hill House is a must more pleasurable and easier read due to similar reasons I just stated. For the sake of argument, what the Haunting lacks that Turn of the Screw delivered in terms of style was the usage of italics and hyphens to create abrupt changes. Both books uses these devices, however, Turn of the Screws seems to use it a little more I think that it adds to the point of view that Turn of Screw has with the sudden changes in thought and how the mind emphasizes certain aspects of character actions. Though difficult to understand at times, it does add an interesting effect to the book.
Being the avid horror literature critique that I have learned to become, I noticed that “The Haunting of Hill House’s” overall language, sentence structure, page layout, etc. made it quite a bit easier to read. While reading “The Turn of the Screw”, I found myself constantly retracing my steps and daydreaming while helplessly trying to scrape through the pages to still have a general sense of confusion upon the completion of the text. I suppose the deficit in publishing dates could account for most of the language issues that I ran into; or it could just be my general lack of elevated vocabulary. Also, the pages seemed a bit crammed in “The Turn of the Screw.” I guess this could be due to the fact that we dealt with the Thrift Edition; however, at times, it was somewhat discouraging when I would read for hours upon hours only to my subtle disappointment that I had only read twenty pages. Please don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed the text; after I completed it and took some time to reflect on the occasion. The style that Shirley Jackson encompassed seemed a lot easier to digest. It was much clearer to me and I rarely found myself backtracking. Because of my ability to understand the text thus far, it has made my journey contain a bit more direction and promise.
Carlos
In response to Priyaa: I think anticipation in Jackson’s novel is very useful. It allows the reader to think of what is to come even when nothing important is going on in the present. James didn’t seem to use this literary device often. There often times entire chapters devoted to describing how normal everything seemed. The rise and fall of action keeps the reader engaged while still moving the plot along so the reader doesn’t get bored with the story. I think foreshadowing and anticipation make Jackson’s novel move faster and flow easier in terms of major events happening throughout the story.
I think both of the novels are equally hard to read. Although, The Turn of the Screw was written in older language and the language is more poetic, it doesn’t necessarily make it harder. I think it just makes you focus more because the point the author is trying to make with each phrase isn’t just spelled out for you, you have to break down and interpret everything. Turn of the Screw was a much more descriptive novel and it is easy to imagine the scenes because the author does such a great job of detailing them.
The Haunting of Hill House uses simpler language but is much more wordy in my opinion. The author took three chapters just to get the main characters in the house, which I think was unnecessary. Sometimes I get confused with who is talking, whether it is the narrator or Eleanor. The page layout and the way the author broke down each individual chapters into even smaller components makes it easier to follow. Usually when you start a chapter you want to know how long it is until you finish it and since she has made them smaller within themselves it makes it less of a hassle to get to the end.
I think I (so far) enjoy Turn of the Screw better. It required much more thinking and I like that the novel can be interpreted in a dozen ways. I think James is very intelligent, and he knew how to pick peoples brains. The Haunting of Hill House just seems more like a scary children’s story than a piece of literary work.
The Haunting is definitely an easier read. Anyone who thought The Turn of the Screw was easier to read was probably born in 1898. The Haunting has a straight forward style whereas The Turn of the Screw has a more ambiguous way of delivering the story. The way Henry James went on with those run on sentences with, as I might say, like a million commas, and, the dashes- like a cool breeze on the British countryside- made me have to reread a sentence 10 times to finally figure out what's going on. This is just because that was probably the vernacular of the time. It’s easier for us to read The Haunting because it is closer to our vernacular. Henry James uses first person narration and fewer dialogs as opposed to Shirley Jackson who uses much more dialog between the characters.
Which style do I like better? I cannot say. Each style is unique and good in its own way. I like the ambiguity that James uses. You read it, and you paint a picture of what is being described, and when you finish you wonder 'did that just happen the way I thought?’ Its kind of like the book A Clockwork Orange, the author ambiguously uses made-up words for certain things and when you finish reading a scene, you’re shocked at what you think just happened, but you're still unsure about what actually did happen, I like that. I like Shirley Jackson’s style too. It’s more exciting and faced paced.
I found the Haunting of hill House easier to read than the Turn of the Screw. The structure of the pages weren't as long and drawn out as in the Hill House book. The language was more modern English than in the Turn of the Screw also.
The two books seem to draw many parallels, yet are very different in style. For me, and it seems that for everyone else as well, that The Haunting of Hill House is much more easy to read. The descriptions througout each chapter and each paragraph allow form the reader to relate to the situation and the character; this is a contrast to Turn of the Screw, which was much more distant and stream of consciousness. The Haunting of Hill House is much lengthier in its description of color, temperature, decorations, sounds, etc. Because this book is partially Eleanor’s perspective and partially an outside narrator, the many perspectives gives us more details and assurance of what is real. We not only read of Eleanor’s lies, but also her afterthoughts on why she said them. The Turn of the Screw provided no such detail, which led to its ambiguity and distance. There were clearly two different perspectives on the book: was the governess insane or were there really ghosts? In The Haunting of Hill House, we are pretty sure that the location is the source of horror, but Eleanor may have some psychological part as well. The clarity throughout this 2nd book seems like it will show Jackson’s motives more clearly than James’, at least for a first reading of.
As I said in class, I enjoyed The Turn of the Screw because its ambiguity wanted me to re-read it. This seems the farther than the opposite for The Haunting of Hill House. Since I’ve seen the movie, the book has become mundane. It’s very much plot driven, unlike The Turn of the Screw, so once I know it, it seems like there’s not much else to read. Even the newer movie, with the inconsistent ending with that of the book, have away enough of the plot to elicit such boredom. It’s easier to read, yet at the same time, much less interesting.
Post a Comment