Victorians! discussion

For background and general information about the story.

Several members have indicated that they will discuss information here that will reveal much about the storyline, so PLEASE do not read this thread if you wish to AVOID spoilers.

This article specifically addresses teaching TotS alongside Coetzee's Disgrace, but these lines seem relevant to where we are in the story:

"...It is precisely the ferocity with which James sustains ambiguity in the novella that draws us as contemporary readers raised on postmodern variance to it. What I appreciate most about James’s story in the classroom is the way in which students open themselves up to the difficult possibilities of multiple interpretations and of the possible simultaneity of conflicting views. This leads me to ask what kind of pedagogical lessons might be learned from the way readers in my classroom embrace, negotiate, and explore the ambiguities within this demanding text...."

http://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&...

If you have access to online resources from your library, you might want to see the entire article here (I haven't accessed it):

"Hesitating Readers: When The Turn of the Screw Meets Disgrace in the Classroom"
by Laura Moss
ESC: English Studies in Canada
Volume 35, Issue 2-3, June/September 2009
pp. 129-144 | 10.1353/esc.2009.0004

https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bi...

A look at the story as interpreted in Britten's chamber opera. Definitely has spoilers, but one can ask, do they "help"?

I have nothing profound to say about it, but I have always enjoyed the film The Innocents, starring Deborah Kerr, which is an adaptation of this story. The last time I watched it, I thought that it strongly hinted that the governess was insane.

For any fans of the old Gothic soap opera Dark Shadows (not the recent movie), you may remember that most of the storylines were based on classic horror novels/stories. An early storyline was based on The Turn of the Screw, with the ghosts of Quentin and Beth appearing in the modern time to the children David and Amy, and eventually posessing them. It was this storyline that introduced Quentin Collins (played by David Selby) to the show; Quentin came to be one of the main characters. Over the course of the series, he was a ghost, a zombie (not the modern, flesh-eating kind), a werewolf, and a version of Dorian Grey! I had a huge crush on him!

"If the Turn of the Screw has an ethical message, it is that the idea of forcing one's personal interpretation of events, or perceptions of reality, on others can become dangerous for both the one fervently trying to convince (in this case the governess), and the potentially convinced (the children and Mrs. Grose), especially since it may at times seem seductive and even beneficial for the convincer to do so. -- JiM"

From a medley of reactions to the story (avoid if concerned about spoilers):

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~sflor...

Another quotation from the above: "THE question of Turn of the Screw centers not on the ambiguities who possesses whom, but rather in a broader discussion of possession and who possesses the text. -- Sean" Bold added.

There are two short articles on Victorian Web about the Victorian governess novels, although they don't mention Henry James, I think The Turn of the Screw engages with this genre just as much as it does with the Gothic and ghost stories, so it might be interesting / useful to know more about it.

http://www.victorianweb.org/gender/wa...
http://www.victorianweb.org/genre/wad...

Neat links, Andreea. Thanks.

The New Yorker just published an article on this very work today:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs...

I'm upset that I dont have more time to defend why I loved this book so much. I thought it was fascinating that you could easily read two meanings into all the dialogue, and its actually sparked some interest for me in Freud's ideas of conversian and mass hysteria (not always entirely sexual I've found out, and was a bit surprised). Any ways hope you enjoy the article.

Becky wrote: "The New Yorker just published an article on this very work today:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs...

I'm upset that I dont have more ti..."


Becky - I'm glad you loved the book. I think there are books for everybody, but not every book is for everybody. I also think timing has a lot to do with it too. I've never been a James fan, and unfortunately, this one really reinforced to me why. Still am very happy to have read it.

Deborah wrote: "Becky - I'm glad you loved the book. I think there are books for everybody, but not every book is for everybody."

Totally agree. Which is a good thing, because there are so many books printed in English that it's a darn good thing that we like different books or a lot of them would never sell a single copy!

As to the article, I scratched my head over this sentence: "These are the ghosts of former employees at Bly: a valet and a previous governess. In life, scandalously, the two of them had been discharged as illicit lovers, and their spectral visitations with the children hint at Satanism and possible sexual abuse. "

I don't recall anybody in our discussion even mentioning Satanism, yet she assumes it's there (I guess we're all too stupid to have seen it!), and she states outright that they were illicit lovers, even though I still think that's a possibility but not a certainty. (Do we ever see them appear at the same time? I don't recall that.)

Interesting article, though, even if she didn't read the same story, or at least read the same story the same way, as I did.

I do believe that Quint and Jessel were lovers, but what I disagree with is that they were dismissed for it. I'd have to reread, but I thought that Jessel left on her own, and I believe that Quint was still employed when he was found dead on the road.

I certainly didn't get any impressions of Satanism from the story.

They never did appear together, but there was the incident when the governess encountered Quint on the staircase, and after he disappeared, she saw Jessel sitting on the stairs, in an attitude of despair.

I think when I said "defend" it was too strong of a word, I just wish I had more time to explain why I enjoyed it. I can definitly see how its lack of a conclusion and its unneccessary wordiness could be just weearisome.

I was, in the end, scratching my head at the lack of the Christmas party's reappearance. Its like James had forgotten he had started the story that way.

Becky wrote: "I was, in the end, scratching my head at the lack of the Christmas party's reappearance. Its like James had forgotten he had started the story that way. "

I agree; I was bothered by that, too. It seemed incomplete not to return to the frame narrative.

I would have liked to have known what happened after Miles died - what kind of contact she had with the master, etc. Also, how she could have gotten another job as a governess after that, as we know she was later governess to Douglas' sister. She would have needed references, and I can't believe that she would have gotten favorable ones based on her employment at Bly. Douglas even had a crush on her when he met her, so she probably didn't seem mentally unbalanced at that point.

Denise wrote: "I would have liked to have known what happened after Miles died - what kind of contact she had with the master, etc. Also, how she could have gotten another job as a governess after that, as we kn..."

Really excellent questions!

(And you wouldn't have to fret over these things it it hadn't been such an open-ended story! [g])

Are Collins and Mary writing their novels about the same time. I definatley see the Collins and Thackery influence.

Everyman wrote: "Really excellent questions!

(And you wouldn't have to fret over these things it it hadn't been such an open-ended story! [g])"

Ha, ha! There are different types of open endings, though. This is where you just don't get facts about what happened afterwards, or like in the Aspern Papers, where we didn't find out such thing as where Tia's money came from. But the other kind is where there are multiple explanations for what was going on, and you are left to draw your own conclusions. Were the ghosts real, or was the governess insane? In The Haunting of Hill House, was the house haunted, was Eleanor doing it herself, or was the house itself a sentient, evil thing? I don't think every author can pull this off skillfully, but it is interesting when they can.