The Turn of the Screw
The Turn of the Screw: One of the Most Debated Novels
Turn of the Screw: A Marxist Perspective: A Criticism
The Turn of the Screw has been one of the most debated novels of all time because it leaves blank spaces in the text that Henry James intentionally left. Those blank spaces are being filled in with the readers’ own background of history and literature. Marxist perspective is one of those backgrounds one needs to know of. This paper is written to critique Robbins’ work considering the Turn of the Screw.
Robbins starts off by explaining Marxist theory: telling about historical context while having an effect on it, and accepting history as an infinite and unfinished thing (376-377). I agree to this at a point – that is, Marxist theory has to have the historical background to talk about the following things, events and problems. He says “The ghost-story genre has its own (literary) history. And then there is the social history of the literary marketplace, where ghost stories “sell” better than more “serious” fiction” (376). Considering love themed novels as “serious” fiction, I agree with this idea because considering the era the Turn of the Screw was written, people were seemingly religious; they were likely to be affected by “ghosts,” rather than a fundamentally-blank love story. We know that the era consists of class differences in society, that is – upper class looked down upon working class. Since the book is set in a castle, there are, of course, servants, which we call the working class. Robbins says “When the social station of the person you are addressing is at stake, there are severe limits on what can be said” (380). I think it is not only because of their social station but Mrs. Grose also seems like she is hiding some information from the governess. I think the way Mrs. Grose says “she” (James 58) is like she is comparing Miss Jessel and the governess; even having a name, Miss Jessel is shown to be superior to the governess. So, I personally disagree with Robbins here, because language has no limits, it keeps changing constantly. Therefore, one can say anything excluding their social status if the language is well-used. Moreover, he says “They [power and hierarchy] even determine what can be seen” (380), I do not agree with this, either. Ghosts are ghosts for each character if the narration is in the third person, if we have the ability to know what everyone thinks and experiences, but since the Turn of the Screw is written in the first person narrator, it may depend on the character’s background and psychology, if we are to say that they all have different consciousness. Mrs. Grose’s failure to see the ghost has nothing to do with social status, I think. If we compare Mrs. Grose to the governess, I do not see a difference between the two apart from their experiences, but it is rather unknown whether Mrs. Grose sees the ghosts or not.
Moving forward, Robbins says “The former governess, like the present governess, has allowed her erotic desires to stray across class lines; the only difference is that the object of Miss Jessel’s feelings is someone below her on the social scale rather than someone above her” (381). I think we can interpret this in this way: if Miss Jessel is in love with someone who is socially below her, the governess may fall in love with, unfortunately, either Miles or, the Uncle. In either way, she addresses a male figure that is superior to her considering class differences, that is why she seeks a way to escape her reality of being a governess. At this point, I also would like to mention that the name “Miles” may also refer to distance that he is the one she is never having a relationship with. No matter how hard she tries, he will always be distant to her. This is both applicable to Miles and the uncle, one is “mentally” distant, and one is “physically.”
Additionally, Robbins says “In a society which routinely referred to class difference in terms of “upstairs” […] and “downstairs” […], these staircase scenes are heavily charged with the symbol of hierarchy” (381). I agree on this point with Robbins. Miss Jessel was seen “upstairs,” whereas Peter Quint was “downstairs” in terms of the steps of the staircase. So it can be concluded from this quotation that the staircase may refer to social ranks and Robbins makes a good use of it.
Finally, the reader is being told that the governess “finds herself again in “the presence” of Miss Jessel’s ghost. […] Some force – perhaps her unconscious, perhaps only James’s text – is evidently pushing her to ask what points of similarity there might be between her and the ghost” (382-383). I think we can relate this to Miles; he is only a child but she can choose neither Miles, nor the uncle. She seems to have a passion for both male characters – that is, thinking that Miles is possessed by Quint, she finds a piece of Miss Jessel in herself, as they had been lovers.
To sum up, Robbins makes good use of some claims that he talked about, but there are some other points that I disagree. Having said that, the Turn of the Screw is once again one of those novels that the readers should be aware of its time and surroundings and happenings also. Unlike other critics, Robbins, I think, grasps the Marxist perspective in a better way than those of gender studies or psychology.
Description of Mrs. Grose in Turn of the Screw
The Character of Mrs. Grose
In Henry James’s novella, The Turn of the Screw, the governess observes and describes the housekeeper, Mrs. Grose, as “a stout simple plain clean wholesome woman” (13) within half an hour of meeting her. The governess’s description of Mrs. Grose turns out to be true. Mrs. Grose’s trusting character makes her simple, plain, and clean, while her dedication to the children makes her stout and wholesome.
Mrs. Grose is clean, being pure and innocent as she is trustful of others. She is trustful of the children, believing that they are incapable of being corrupted or bad. She responded with disbelief saying, “Master Miles!–him an injury?… It’s too dreadful… to say such cruel things! Why he’s scarce ten years old” (18) when the governess accuses Miles of being an “injury” to others as a result of the letter informing of his expulsion from school. Her trusting character also makes her plain and simple, as she is presenting no difficulty or challenges to the governess’s beliefs and is easily persuaded and influenced by her. She believes the governess’s claim that “[Peter Quint] was looking for little Miles” (39) to corrupt him and that Flora was hiding that she was able to see Miss Jessel. Mrs. Grose was influenced by the governess to also believe the ghosts were corrupting the children and had personally asked Flora, “where, my pet, is Miss Jessel” (107) when both she and the governess had avoided confronting the children with the subject. Mrs. Grose’s view of the children changes as a result of the governess’s influence. Mrs. Grose started out believing that the children were inherently innocent even when presented with the letter of Miles’s expulsion from school, and just because of the governess’s claims of the ghosts corrupting the children, she at the end of the story, blatantly accuses the children of being bad when she says accusatively that “Miles stole letters” (118).
Mrs. Grose is stout and wholesome because of her dedication to the children. She is stout because she is determined to care for the children. Mrs. Grose had been at Bly through the deaths of two employees, Miss Jessel and Peter Quint. Though two deaths would be strange and haunting, she remained at Bly and “was acting for the time as superintendent” (9) to Flora, whom she was “extremely fond” (9) of, between the time of the death of Miss Jessel and the arrival of the new governess. Mrs. Grose also stayed at Bly when it became more haunting with the governess claiming that the ghosts of Miss Jessel and Peter Quint were seeking to corrupt the children. She assists the governess in protecting the children from corruption when she leaves with Flora to comply with the governess’s request to “get [Flora] away, far from this… far from them” (117). She is wholesome because of this, as she believes that she is promoting the moral innocence of the children by helping the governess save the children from corruption by taking them away from the influence of the ghosts.
In Henry James’s novella, The Turn of the Screw, the housekeeper, Mrs. Grose, is described by the governess as “a stout simple plain clean wholesome woman” (3). The governess’s description of her is true because she is shown to be clean, plain, and simple due to how she is overly trusting and gullible with her belief that the children are inherently innocent and how she was easily persuaded by the governess’s claims that the children are corrupted. She is shown to be stout and wholesome as she is dedicated to the children and is determinant in protecting them from the corrupting influence of the ghosts.
Depiction of Victorian Era in Turn of the Screw
Inequalities in the Victorian Era
To understand the uncles and the governess’s motivations in Henry James’ Novella, The Turn of the Screw, the reader must recognize the social, class, and gender inequalities between men and women during the Victorian era.
During the time the Victorian era, women and men were not equal, but women began to gain more rights than they had before. A new class of women called the “working woman” was born during this time. James uses the main protagonist, the governess, to portray the working woman. Even though the position of a governess was a more common job for women, she still strove to make money for herself. This was one of the most important qualities of the “working woman” as the drive to work often accompanied the drive to earn more rights. In the novella, the governess accepted the job because of its pay, which demonstrates her dedication to make a name for herself as a working woman. The governess chose to support herself as an independent woman, instead of choosing the more common Victorian roll of a woman and settling down with a husband. This dedication is shown in the governess’s interview. While towards the beginning of the interview the governess had doubts about accepting the position, when she realized that “the salary offered much exceeded her modest measure” (James 1) she took the job. This choice shows the governess’s drive as a “working woman” due to the fact that it was the salary that made her decision. After obtaining the position, the governess and worked hard to perform the job to the best of their abilities.
Men during this time period didn’t have the same problems as women. Men had better schooling, better jobs, better pay and all rights. The Victorian era was the age of chivalrous men, especially upper-classmen were expected to act with honor and not scoundrels. That being said, in his novella, James, portrays his male characters in a bad light. For example The Uncle, ignored his responsibilities to the children, even though they were his own niece and nephew. Instead of trying to raise the children, the Uncle put all charges onto the governess, playing little to no role in the children’s upbringing. James shows that the uncle opposed what men were supposed to be like in the Victorian Era. James used the children’s uncle to portray a mistake of men in the Victorian era the same way he used the governess to portray a proper “working woman.” “Working-class women, many of whom were not connected to prostitution, were labeled as “decadent” whore figures while men seeking prostitutes were given a pass. Men were not held responsible for their sexual dalliances until the end of the century, when stories spread about virginal brides being infected with sexually transmitted diseases from their husbands.” (Tomyn 3)
All in all, men and women were not equal during the Victorian era. They had different rights, jobs, pay, and schooling. Even though, women still strived to be a working woman and make their own wage. Henry James, the Turn of the Screw, portrays these inequalities between men and women through the uncle’s unchivalrous attitude and the governess’s striving to become the working woman of that era. Today, the working woman is not new to this era. There are many women who have led the country into what it is today.
The Turn of The Screw By Henry James
The Turn of The Screw is a horror novella by the American author Henry James, It was published in the year 1898, the view on this novel has been different throughout the course of history especially looking at it through the lens of a feminist, during the time this novella was written in 1898 this was the time of first wave feminism. The first wave of feminism focused on mainly on things like the right for women to vote and legal matters however during this wave women had very little say especially as this novella was written about nine years before the suffragette movement. We do see the strong stereotypes throughout this story one being right at the beginning when the men are speaking of their stories in front of the fire and the women are sat around listening and laughing along, this at the time may have seemed like such an innocent aspect of the novel however looking at it from a modern feminist perspective we can see that this is a subtle example of how female voices were very hidden during the times this novel was written. Women were seen as inferior to men with no power in any situations whether it was working life or social life the men during the 19th century really did hold the shots. Men were privileged in ways for example they were allowed to have an education and working life, this is why the character of the governess challenged these stereotypes in a way as she seemingly had a good education and she did support herself with a job looking after Flora and Miles. Another reason this was very strange was not only because she was a woman but also because she was very young.
In result of the timing this novella was written there was definitely an uprise in feminism as saying earlier the Suffragette movement did actually come alive greatly a few years later but I believe that Henry James subtly catches the uprise in feminism in different ways throughout the text for example when the governess first arrives at the house and is given her responsibilities James uses the metaphor “great drifting ship.” James. 1965. page 17) This is very significant for a feminist reader for a few reasons the first being that ships are often by males referred to in a feminine pronoun for example “she” or “her”. The idea of pursuing feminist uproar and views through literature also caught on through time for example authors like Mary Shelley and Emily Bronte having powerful female protagonists to show a change throughout literature. The governess throughout the novel explains certain situations which indicate the lifestyle of women through literature for example when she talks about her younger life with her family and compares it to the life that she is living now in Bly she says “small smothered life.” (James 1965,page 25) this is a huge indication to the lack of freedom she experienced when she was younger and as a reader we can assume maybe this was in result of society’s views on women for example that they should stay in the house especially younger females and children should be taught on life being a good wife. In comparison to this throughout the novel I believe we see the governess really break out of her shell and this feels even to the reader as a relief as there is a contrast in a way between her old small smothered life and now her wide open country life. There is a few juxtapositions however throughout the novel were James does actually still follow the same patriarchal society for example even though the character of the governess is quite ambiguous he still sets her dreams of marrying a rich man and in some way falling head over heels for him which is a complete juxtaposition to the fact that she has graduated from a college and is highly intelligent with her own job, this sets her back from the ambiguous character in which Henry James tries to portray many times. This was a common dream and ultimate goal for many women of the victorian era as they were very limited in what they could actually achieve overall in life.
The novel gives some sort of impression that women are prone to things such as mental instability and can’t deal with their emotions with many scholars actually believing the governess was in fact just hallucinating when seeing the ghosts and they were a fixture of her imagination or even her sexual desire. I believe James wanted to himself question the insanity of the governess as throughout the novel we are unsure to believe if the ghosts are in fact fixtures of her imagination. Mrs Grose however is a true representation of what women would typically be like during the Victorian era for example she was quite illiterate in comparison to the governess, she is seemingly very admirative of the governed treating her with a high amount of respect. I believe this is because Mrs Grose admired the fact that the governess didn’t actually stick to the gender norms of the victorian era and may women of this time were very strung up in relationships were men controlled their life.
Entertaining Dread: the Contrived Aesthetic Experience of Fear in Henry James’ “The Turn of the Screw”
The Turn of the Screw has been read by some analysts as a straightforward ghost story and by others as a psychologically accurate – whether pre-or post-Freudian — portrait of mental illness or repression breaking out. However enjoyable it is to consider Henry James’ short story from any of these or similar points of view, it strikes me as particularly interesting to look at it as a kind of metafiction, a story about storytelling that explores the power of language to create mood or to evoke emotional or psychological responses through the power of suggestion.
In some ways this story and its opening frame are reminiscent of the almost archetypal scenario of children sitting in the dark telling spooky stories. Also, it calls to mind a particular scene in the Wonderworks film adaptation of Lucy Maude Montgomery’s Anne of Green Gables. In that scene, the characters Anne Shirley and Diana Berry are alone together in a gloomy wood, and they start reciting to one another all the chilling ghost tales they can recall and talking about how “deliciously frightened” they are. In the novel, Anne confesses to her aunt that “Diana and I just imagined the wood was haunted. All the places around here are so–so–COMMONPLACE. We just got this up for our own amusement. We began it in April. A haunted wood is so very romantic.… Oh, we have imagined the most harrowing things” (Montgomery 229). Similarly, Henry James demonstrates in his Turn of the Screw a keen understanding of the delight that typically imaginative people derive from being scared and, indeed, in scaring themselves.
James’ story is a masterful sort of meta-chiller that works on the imagination of the reader while allowing events recounted by characters within the story to work on the imaginations of other characters, to effects at times obvious and at other times ambiguous. Part of the ambiguity surrounding the story involves whether the governess who narrates her own tale has effectively scared herself with phantasms and other observations that originate in her own mind. Her indirect reference to certain then-contemporary works of Victorian horror or gothic suspense (The Mystery of Udolpho, Jane Eyre) may be a hint from the author about her or about the story in which she finds herself. “Was there a ‘secret’ at Bly—a mystery of Udolpho or an insane, an unmentionable relative kept in unsuspected confinement?” (James 312). Although the interpretation of the story and the question of its realism are debatable, it seems obvious that James intended, while telling a chilling tale, also to explore the complicity of the imaginative audience member in creating the effect – the pleasurable dread or terror – such tales may convey.
Whether or not these kinds of stories are true is less important than the effectiveness of the storytelling style, whether the narrative elicits the desired response in hearers or readers. Of course, James occasionally uses some fairly heavy-handed means to evoke the edgy mood in The Turn of the Screw, even beginning his story with a discussion about what makes a tale the kind of story that can hold listeners “sufficiently breathless” (James 291), what gives it each successive “turn of the screw” (James 292). Also, the author has his characters offer their own commentaries on the emotional impact of their stories – Douglas refers dramatically to the “dreadfulness” of the account he is leading up to telling, even stating that it is “beyond everything. Nothing that I know touches it,” with respect to its “uncanny ugliness and horror and pain” (ibid).
This is quite a dramatic setup for a story that has yet to be revealed. Such a characterization creates anticipation, primes the reader for a strong response and demands a payoff. It is a bold move on the part of James, since to fail to provide a sufficient emotional payoff could leave the author open to accusations of overstatement or melodramatic superfluity. And speaking of the superfluous, throughout the story there is continual repetition of emotionally evocative pejoratives like dread, horror, queer, insane, corrupt, et cetera, as well as frequent use of exclamation points and italics. The text itself seems emotionally manipulative, bent on an effect, and if the reader is unwilling or unable to go where the text is apparently leading, the effect would certainly be, from an author’s point of view, unfortunate, and the story would likely fail to satisfy.
James leaves the reader with little reason to doubt that the payoff he has set up is coming. However, one of the author’s principle means of manipulation in Turn of the Screw is delayed gratification. There is much hesitation, holding back of details after the insinuation of what is to come, inviting the listeners within the story as well as readers of the story to let their imaginations flow into the gaps. Again, the author is not at all subtle about it; he blatantly points to the technique early on (James 297), in an exchange between Douglas, his secondary–in the ordinal sense–narrator, and one of his listeners.
So far had Douglas presented his picture when someone put a question. “And what did the former governess die of? – of so much respectability?”
Our friend’s answer was prompt. “That will come out. I don’t anticipate.”
“Excuse me – I thought that was just what you are doing.”
Further down the same page, after giving out a few more thin details, Douglas makes an insinuation, a reference to some unforeseen danger in the governess’s story, of which she was unaware at the outset but of which “she did learn. You shall hear tomorrow what she learned.” Again Douglas gives out more sparse information and, as the primary, unnamed narrator states, “with this, [he] made a pause that, for the benefit of the company, moved [him] to throw in” his own titillating guess about what was still to come in the narrative. This prompts Douglas to get up, turn his back on his audience, and stir the fire before going further with his tale – that is, his setup of the governess’s tale.
While I count three main narratives in Turn of the Screw, nested like Babushka dolls, there are technically several more stories within stories in this complex narrative, and even more storytellers mentioned than there are narratives given, rather than summarized or referenced. Notably Douglas begins his allusion to the unnamed governess’s story after at least two other narrators, Griffin and another, have told their own ghost tales to the company, to varying effect. Within Douglas’ story, there is the governess’s tale, in which she speaks of what she learns from Mrs. Grose and, even before that, of being told by her master what he judged to be his own pertinent history: “He told her frankly all his difficulty – that for several applicants the conditions had been prohibitive. They were, somehow, simply afraid. It sounded dull – it sounded strange; and all the more so because of his main condition” (James 297). Meanwhile, Miles, the governess’s male charge, has a number of opportunities in dialogue to tell his story, carefully clipped as it is by his wariness and clouded by the impressions and interpretations of the governess who transcribes it.
All this underscores the likelihood that James is telling a story about storytelling, about the impact of the interplay between text and allusion, reference and repetition, insinuation and inference, hesitation and anticipation, mood and manipulation. With an audience that is willing to be guided — or capable of being mesmerized — and an author who is adept at it, as James is, a story can create impressions, misdirect or focus attention, and evoke particular and highly entertaining effects, dreadful or otherwise. In the case of The Turn of the Screw, the author has given his short story just enough masterfully contrived “turns” to encourage his readers, especially those with the right sort of susceptibility to his techniques, to give an added twist or two to a tale already fraught with delightfully chilling torque.
James, Henry. The Turn of the Screw and Other Short Novels. Signet Classic, New York: 1962.
Montgomery, Lucy Maude. Anne of Green Gables. Bantam, New York: 1981.
Interpreting the plot of Henry James novel The turn of the screw
The Crossroads Between Reason and Insanity
Henry James’s novel, The Turn of the Screw, presents a plot that can be interpreted several different ways depending on how the reader wishes to interpret it. Many readers believe the governess is really seeing the ghosts of Peter Quint and his mistress as well as the former governess, Ms. Jessel. However, another set of readers and critics believe that the governess obsesses over the children and their former governess that she drives herself to mental insanity, leading her to hallucinate. In my own opinion, I think the governess may have seen the ghosts of Peter Quint and Ms. Jessel but the circumstances may not have been as extreme as she made them seem. Considering the governess had never met Quint and Jessel when they were alive, it is almost impossible that she could have seen their ghosts without knowing what they looked like. However, I believe that seeing the apparitions slowly drove the new governess to insanity as her mind was consumed by theories that the ghosts were trying to corrupt the children and maybe even herself.
As the new governess began her job working with two children, Flora and Miles, she seemed to be in a sound state of mind, eager to begin working at the Bly estate. Nonetheless, within the first few days that the governess had been working with Flora, she experienced occurrences that most people would deem peculiar. She began to see a ghost-like man, who she later discovered was the ghost of Peter Quint, a former valet at Bly. The governess finds out that Flora’s brother, Miles, was permanently dismissed from school for unknown reasons. She tried to make sense of the situation as everyone at the Bly estate believed Miles to be a well-behaved, well-mannered young man. As more time passed, the governess also began to see the ghost of the previous governess, Ms. Jessel. She started to believe that she children were communicating with the ghosts, almost as a type of possession. When Flora suddenly falls ill, she talks to Mrs. Grose, a servant at Bly, she uses language that shocks Mrs. Grose as she has no idea where she could have learned that language. “‘From that child – horrors! There!’ she sighed with tragic relief. ‘On my honour, Miss, she says things-! But at this evocation she dropped down; she dropped with a sudden cry upon my sofa” (109). Considering the amount of time that Ms. Grose has spent with the children, which is far longer than the governess has, she still deems it extremely out of character for Flora to be acting this way. This goes to show that there’s something causing the children to act like this, qualifying the governess’s theory that the children are conspiring with ghosts.
The other interpretation of the plot of the story is that the governess is mentally unsound, which is the belief that I have come to accept. When the governess first arrives at Bly, she doesn’t show any signs of instability as her stability seems to progress into a downward spiral throughout her time there. As she begins to learn more about the previous governess, Ms. Jessel, and her lover, Peter Quint, she begins to obsess over their history. The more she thought about them, the further she developed her theory that the children were conspiring with the two ghosts. “But even while they pretend to be lost in their fairy-tale they’re steeped in their vision of the dead restored to them.”… “they’re talking of them – they’re talking horrors!” (69). The governess explains to Ms. Grose that the children have deceived everyone at Bly, creating the facade of being well-behaved and obedient children. She believes that she observed the true nature and devious ways of the children as they pretend they have not seen what she has. However, these suspicions only escalate as the governess continues to obsess over the ghosts and their control over the children. When she decides that the Bly estate is no longer safe for the children, she sends Ms. Grose, Flora and the rest of the staff away so that she is alone in the house with Miles, who she plans to have confront the ghost of Peter Quint to finally be free from his presence and influence. “I was so determined to have all my proof that I flashed into ice to challenge him. ‘Whom do you mean by ‘he’?’ ‘Peter Quint—you devil!’” (124). At the peak of her insanity, the governess tries to coax a confession out of Miles, to get him to admit that he, too, sees the ghost of Peter Quint and that he has been communicating with him the whole time. When Miles says “you devil”, he could either be referring to the governess or the ghost of Peter Quint. However, I choose to believe that Miles is addressing the governess, and that his sudden death that follows is caused by the madness of the governess. Throughout the story, we see her identity transform as she’s consumed by the idea of needing to save the children from a greater evil, driving her to insanity. Her mental fragility only led her to put Miles in a situation that could only result in him being mentally scarred. By the end of the story, it is clear that the governess feels as though she has completed her mission of saving the children, even though Miles died. She was able to convince herself that she only did what was necessary, seeing his death as a victory over the greater evil that had only existed in her mind.
Overall, the horror story The Turn of the Screw has left readers to interpret whether or not the governess is truly insane or if she had actually experienced paranormal activity. By leaving this up for interpretation, Henry James sparked controversy among literary critics, never commenting on what he believed was the true reason behind what happened at Bly. While the belief that the governess and the children were being haunted by the ghosts of Peter Quint and Ms. Jessel would justify much of what happened in the story, the same events can be justified by the potential mental insanity of the governess. In my own opinion, the governess drove herself to the madness that eventually consumed her, leaving her and others scarred for life. Her paranoia that the children were conspiring against her with ghosts was her way of coping with the fact that the children were not as pure and innocent as everyone had told her. These suspicions only grew as more incidents occured, where her perceptions became her reality.
“The Malevolent Governess and the Benevolent Ghosts”: A Subversive Reading of The Turn of the Screw
This paper postulates a subversive reading of Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw. The novella ostensibly relates the tale of a governess who struggles to shield her charges from supernatural malevolence. Yet I suggest that it is actually the story of a governess who abuses her charges in an attempt to take control of Bly. The ghosts, conversely, are benevolent companions to the children. My thesis is loosely based on Sami Ludwig’s article, “Metaphors, Cognition and Behavior: The Reality of Sexual Puns in The Turn of the Screw,” in which Ludwig argues that Miles and the governess are having an affair. Ludwig claims that when Miles tells the governess, on their way to church – “You know, my dear, for a fellow to be with a lady always-” (53) – he is subtly suggesting that their relationship become sexual, thereby instigating their affair. Ludwig points to the feelings of helplessness and fear that Miles’ suggestion arouses in the governess, claiming that her precarious position, as a woman who is neither a family member, nor a servant, renders her helpless to flatly refuse. She therefore reacts with confusion, dodging the boy’s innuendos and hurrying towards the church. Ludwig subsequently turns to the second bedroom scene, in which Miles asks the governess to come to his room and admits that he has been lying awake thinking of her. The governess reacts by changing the subject and inquiring about his old school, from which he has been expelled. Their conversation gradually becomes physically intimate, culminating in fierce hugs and kisses between the two. Ludwig interprets this scene as a further step in Miles’ sexual advances towards the governess. He points to the boy’s request for “a new field” (62), arguing that by this request Miles is demanding sexual education. Ludwig also construes words such as “posses,” “little,” and “die” as erotic Shakespearean allusions. In analyzing the novella’s denouement, Ludwig claims that the chaotic sentences following Peter Quint’s final appearance are a guised description of the sexual act. Ludwig notes that the physical positions of the governess and Miles are not specified in this scene, yet their emotions and movements, and the sounds they emit, are detailed. He interprets this discrepancy between omission and specification as a subtle delineation of sexual intercourse between Miles and the governess. Ludwig consequently construes Miles’ “death” as a Shakespearian death: an orgasm. He concludes that The Turn of the Screw is a Bildungsroman depicting a young boy’s sexual initiation by his governess.Ludwig’s analysis, while innovative and insightful, suffers from two fundamental drawbacks. First, the critic’s contention that Miles manipulates the governess into an affair is founded on shaky ground, and I intend to counterclaim that it is rather the governess who seduces Miles. Secondly, Ludwig does not explain the function of the ghosts in the novella. I will address this issue further on in the paper. Ludwig’s assertion that Miles is the instigator of the affair can be refuted by three points. First, the governess refrains from any action that would enable Miles to resume his studies at school. When she learns of the boy’s expulsion, she reacts by doing “‘Nothing at all.'” (13). Even after Miles repeatedly requests to return to school, she remains impassive. This consistent, unprofessional refusal suggests that she has an ulterior motive for keeping Miles at Bly. Secondly, the governess’ behavior towards Miles is overtly sexual even prior to the church scene, in which, according to Ludwig, Miles allegedly initiates the affair. On the night that Miles wanders off to the lawn, the governess leads him back to his room, and caresses him in the following manner: “I placed on his small shoulders hands of such tenderness with which… I held him there well under fire.” (45). Furthermore, as the boy leans forward to kiss her goodnight, the governess returns his kiss, clasps him to her breast, and suggests that he remove his clothes: “I met his kiss and… I folded him for a minute in my arms… I could say – ‘Then you didn’t undress at all?'” (45-6); Hardly appropriate behavior for a governess who is merely evincing motherly affection towards her charge. Third, the governess refers to Miles as “the little gentleman” (10), shortly after she describes the uncle as “a gentleman” (7). This similarity in title suggests that the governess sees Miles in a similar light to that in which she sees the uncle, as a man of higher standing and therefore a potential husband. Although certain critics, such as Beth Newman, claim that the governess is infatuated with the uncle, I argue that she harbors no intense feelings for him. Rather, she wishes to marry him in order to better her financial situation and social status. Douglass explicitly tells us that “what took her [the governess] most of all [about the uncle]… was that he put the whole thing to her as a favour.” (my emphasis, 4). The governess believes that the uncle is requesting her cooperation as a personal “favour,” and that he will consequently be indebted to her if she assents. We may surmise that she hopes he will repay her by marriage, the most important act an upper class gentleman could bestow upon a middle-class woman. Thus, the governess assumes a calculated attitude toward the uncle, not an infatuated one. Furthermore, in the scene between the governess and Mrs. Grose, when the latter extinguishes the governess’ hopes for marriage with the uncle, by telling her, “‘Well, Miss, you’re not the first – and you won’t be the last.'” (8), the governess responds, “‘Oh, I’ve no pretensions… to being the only one.'” (8). Her collected answer supports my argument that the governess perceives the uncle as nothing more than a social ladder to wealth and high status. In light of the governess’ practical approach to marriage with the uncle, we should pay special attention to the question she poses to Mrs. Grose, immediately after learning that he is not interested in her: “My other pupil, at any rate… comes back tomorrow?” (9). The juxtaposition of the governess’ revelation that the uncle is unattainable, and her question concerning Miles, suggests a connection between the two. In order to understand this connection, we must take into account two facts. First, Miles will become the master of Bly when he enters adulthood, and second, Douglas tells us that the governess has “supreme authority” (5) over Miles. Hence, we may conjecture that the juxtaposition signifies the governess’ decision to substitute the inaccessible uncle for Miles, over whom she has an advantageous position. The governess, I suggest, believes she can exploit her power over Miles to manipulate him into marrying her when he comes of age. Their marriage will bestow upon her the title of mistress of Bly, thereby granting her social and financial advantages, similar to those which aroused her interest in the uncle. The governess’ interest in Miles can be further understood through her frequent use of the term “possession.” She applies the word to a variety of actions, including physical grasping: “she always ended… by getting possession of my hand” (65), knowledge accumulation: “they were in possession of everything that had ever happened to me” (49), and even self control: “my show of self-possession” (33). The governess’ reiteration of the word in so many different contexts suggests that she perceives everything around her in terms of possession. In her eyes, people are constantly struggling to control property, each other, and themselves. Accordingly, the governess endeavors to possess Miles, and thus to vicariously posses Bly. At the outset of the narrative she notes that “he [the uncle] had put them [Miles and Flora] in possession of Bly” (my emphasis, 5), and later on describes her behavior towards Miles as an attempt to posses the boy: “I… seize[d] once more the chance of possessing him [Miles]” (62). This description is especially telling when we observe that, among other denotations, “to possess” also means “to have sexual intercourse with” (OED). Based on the arguments heretofore presented, I suggest a reading of the scenes discussed by Ludwig that is diametrically opposed to his analysis. Rather than flirting with the governess on their way to church, Miles is attempting to break free from her. She has been overly intimate with him – “for a fellow to be with a lady always” (53) – and he is frightened by her behavior. He asks her to let him go: “when in the world, please, am I going back to school?” (53), and when she dodges the question, he resorts to pleading: “‘you can’t say I’ve not been awfully good, can you?'” (53). Finally, he threatens to contact his uncle. This is not the behavior of a boy who is teasing his love interest. In the bedroom, when the governess urges Miles – “‘I thought you wanted to go on as you are.'” (61) – the boy rejects her: “‘I don’t – I don’t. I want to get away'” (61). Yet she reacts by forcing herself upon him, twice in the same scene: “I threw myself upon him and… embraced him” (62), “it made me… drop on my knees and seize… him” (62). Miles first asks her to cease – “‘let me alone'” (62) – and when she grabs him a second time, he voices “a loud high shriek” (63). I give little weight to the governess’ claim that he screamed out of fright of “a gust of frozen air” (63). Having established the governess’ malevolence, I would now like to make a case for the ghosts’ benevolence. It seems appropriate at this juncture to reevaluate the governess’ declarations of the ghosts’ “quite unmistakable horror and evil” (30). Ellis Hanson has already observed that the ghosts do not “beckon, invite or solicit the children or… coax them into physical danger” (377). He also remarks that “the children found nothing terrifying about a living Quint and a living Miss Jessel” (377). Dawn Keetley reinforces Hanson’s remark, suggesting that Quint and Miss Jessel “might in fact have been beneficent influences” (149). By integrating these comments with our previous observations on the governess, we may well conclude that the governess’ portrayal of the ghosts is unreliable, and attempt to draw our own conclusions concerning Miss Jessel and Peter Quint. Miss Jessel’s ghost is portrayed throughout the novella as either a weeping victim or a companion to Flora. The fact that Flora enjoys and even seeks the ghost’s company is exemplified by the girl’s assembly of a toy boat, as she plays at the lake’s shore opposite from the shore where Miss Jessel is standing. By assembling this toy boat, Flora expresses her desire to create a vehicle that may carry her over the lake to the ghost. Furthermore, towards the novella’s denouement, Flora sails on a real boat to that very area, thus closing the circle that began with her toy boat. The governess, on her part, exploits her knowledge of the secret meetings between the ghost and the girl to further her plans. She needs to get rid of Mrs. Grose and Flora in order to coerce Miles into full sexual intercourse. She therefore exerts emotional pressure on the girl to reveal her secret, thus driving her to a breaking point: “she [Flora] launched an almost furious wail. ‘Take me away, take me away – oh take me away from her!'” (70). The governess then uses Flora’s breakdown as a pretense to send Flora and Mrs. Grose away: “‘You must take Flora… Away from here. Away from them.'” (73). Note that it is the governess, “her” (70), not the ghosts, “them” (73), from whom Flora wishes to escape. Quint’s ghost rivals the governess in her efforts to possess Miles. Their struggle over the boy begins after the governess sees Quint for a second time, realizing his interest in Miles: “‘He [Quint] was looking for little Miles… That’s whom he was looking for'” (25). Further on in the same scene, Mrs. Grose remarks: “‘Quint was much too free'” (25), to which the governess responds: “‘Too free with my boy?'” (25), thereby claiming Miles as her possession, and expressing anger at Quint’s impingement on her claim. Henceforth the governess regards Quint as a threat – “he was absolutely… a living detestable dangerous presence” (39) – and compares their struggle over Miles to “fighting with a demon for a human soul” (82). It is worth noting that many critics prescribe to her view, construing Mrs. Grose’s remark about Quint’s excessive freedom as a euphemism for his sexual abuse of Miles. Robert W. Hill Jr., for example, claims that “Quint seems to have been capable of… engaging a prepubescent boy in whatever took the man’s perverted fancy.” (58). Textual evidence, however, does not support Quint’s vilification. Quite the contrary, Miles seems to have loved Quint: “for a period of several months Quint and the boy had been perpetually together… as if Quint were his tutor – and a very grand one” (34-35). Hence, I suggest a different interpretation of Mrs. Grose’s remark that “‘Quint was much too free'” (25). Mrs. Grose also states that Quint “‘did what he wished'” (32). This statement can be regarded as a posterior elucidation of her initial remark. If we accept it as such, then Quint’s freedom is his ability to act as he pleases, without subjugation to the will or mores of others. His freedom thus defies the governess’ view of people as either possessors or possessed. Moreover, the governess herself admits that Miles desires freedom: “he [Miles] should probably be able to… gain, for his own purpose, more freedom.” (55), and in a moment of despair she claims that Miles has won “his freedom now” (71). We may therefore surmise that Quint and the governess have antipodal approaches to Miles. While the governess attempts to possess him, Quint tries to accord the boy the freedom he craves. The case for Quint’s benevolence is further strengthened by a biblical allusion embedded in the ghost’s first appearance. Quint’s emergence “at the very top of the tower” (15) alludes to the prophet Habakkuk: “I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me” (my emphasis, King James Version, Hab. 1.1). Habakkuk stands atop a tower to speak to God and condemn the sinners, especially the prideful: “he is a proud man… who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death” (Hab. 1.5). This biblical allusion appears immediately after the governess entertains prideful thoughts about becoming the mistress of Bly – “I fancied myself… a remarkable young woman and took comfort in the faith that this would more publicly appear.” (15) – thereby presenting Quint as a prophet who rises from the dead to chastise the governess for her sins. The struggle between the governess, who attempts to posses Miles, and Quint, who endeavors to free him, culminates in the novella’s denouement. As Ludwig convincingly argues, in this scene the governess and Miles have sexual intercourse, beginning the moment Quint appears in the window. The governess seems to have triumphed, since she has finally coerced the boy into the sexual “act” (81). Moreover, after their sexual intercourse, Quint disappears from Miles’ sight: “he [Miles] had already jerked around, stared, glared again, and seen but the quiet day” (85). Any doubt concerning the governess’ malevolence or Quint’s benevolence dissipates as Miles mourns the loss of Quint, while the governess gloats: “With the stroke of the loss I was so proud of he [Miles] uttered the cry of a creature hurled over an abyss” (85). Yet despite Quint’s disappearance, it may be argued that Miles wins his freedom. Contrary to Ludwig’s reading, I construe Miles’ death as an actual passing away. He dies either from the governess’ strangling grasp, as suggested by Steven Swann Jones, or from emotional trauma, as Robert W. Hill Jr. claims in his paper, or, I may add, from sexual trauma. Whatever the cause, the end result is the same. Miles escapes the governess, “his little heart dispossessed” (85) of her grasp.This paper has proposed an alternative reading of The Turn of the Screw. I have argued that the ostensible devotion of the governess and maliciousness of the ghosts are merely a narrative ploy. Beneath the surface of the text one may unveil the tale of a malevolent governess and two benevolent ghosts. Thus, The Turn of the Screw shows us how easily we are deceived by evil’s facade of righteousness. The novella reminds us to be cautious of what we are told, especially if the words are spoken with unquestioning conviction. Works CitedHanson, Ellis. “Screwing with Children in Henry James.” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 9.3 (2003): 367-391.Hill, Robert W. Jr. “A Counterclockwise Turn in James’s The Turn of the Screw.” Twentieth Century Literature: A Scholarly and Critical Journal 27.1 (1981): 53-71. James, Henry. The Turn of the Screw: Norton 2nd Critical Edition. Eds. Deborah Ensch and Jonathan Warren. New York: Norton & Company, 1999.Jones, Steven Swann. “Folklore in James’s Fiction: Turning the Screw.” Western Folklore 60.1 (2001): 1-24.Keetley, Dawn. “Mothers and Others: Anxieties Over Substitute Mother in The Turn of the Screw.” Approaches to Teaching Henry James’s Daisy Miller and The Turn of the Screw. Eds. Kimberly C. Reed, and Peter G. Beidler. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 2005. 143-50. Ludwig, Sami. “Metaphors, Cognition and Behavior: The Reality of Sexual Puns in The Turn of the Screw.” Mosaic: a Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 27.1 (1994): 33-53.Newman, Beth. “Getting Fixed: Feminine Identity and Scopic Crisis in The Turn of the Screw.” Novel: A Forum on Fiction 26.1 (1992): 43-63.“Possession.” Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989.The Holy Bible: Containing the Old and New Testaments, Authorized King James Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1966.
The Role of Quint and Jessel in Henry James’ “The Turn of the Screw”
Peter Quint and Miss Jessel symbolize the indistinguishable nature of both the governess and Miles’s sexuality in Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw. Whether or not these ghosts actually exist in the literal sense, Quint’s presence evokes what could be construed as sexual desires in the governess while also reminding her of her social status. Similarly, Quint forces the reader to question Miles’s sexuality because of the implication that their past relationship was of a sexual nature. Miss Jessel, on the other hand, serves as the governess’s only reminder of the wickedness of her desire for a sexual self and ultimately, prevents her from acting upon those desires. These developments emphasize the mysteriousness of the connection between Miles and the governess and lead to a deeper sense of dismay about the true nature of their bond. Although The Turn of the Screw begins in a rather somber mood with Douglas’s tale, it quickly shifts tones during the telling of the governess’s first meeting with the wealthy uncle. This scene makes it clear that the governess places the uncle on a pedestal and that she desperately wants to be in such a privileged position herself. Her attraction for him quickly moves beyond that of an employee to one that nears sexual desire. She even describes the “moment [when] he held her hand, thanking her for the sacrifice, she already felt rewarded” (James 29). While this is only the introduction to the piece, her attraction to the uncle plays an enormous role in the subsequent encounters with Quint, a former house worker who was known to parade around in the master’s clothes. In fact, at the moment when she first sees Quint’s alleged ghost, she is fantasizing about meeting the uncle and is nearly fooled by the sight of Quint in the master’s clothes. She proclaims “he did stand there,” as though the man whom she spotted was truly the uncle. However, upon discovery of the man’s true identity, she states that “my second [reaction] was a violent perception of the mistake of my first: the man who met my eyes was not the person I had precipitately supposed” (James 39). She is initially disappointed that she meets Quint rather than the uncle, but soon develops a growing desire to encounter the ghost. This misplaced longing to meet Quint is, however, nothing more than a projection of the governess’s desire for the wealthy uncle rather than true attraction to Quint. While she claims that she “confidently [hurries] to meet” Quint, her enthusiasm is only the result of her misplaced attraction (James 72). She does not really want to meet Quint, but the sight of him allows her to believe that she will one day be in view of the wealthy uncle who is ultimately, the key to the privileged life she has always wanted.This desire for a life of privilege and her apparent desire for the uncle is directly supported by the text within the nature of Quint’s first appearance. Rather than a traditional entrance, he simply appears to the governess “at the very top of a tower” which hangs over a lawn (James 39). This apparent phallic symbol could be seen as a direct insinuation of the Governess’ attraction to Quint. However, the text identifies her attraction to Quint in relation to her desire for the uncle a few lines later. She claims “they were distinguished…though I could see little difference, as the new and the old (James 39). In terms of the two men, the governess suggests here that Quint resembles the uncle and thus, she is drawn to him. This sort of fuzzy logic is a moment which allows the reader to see the credibility of the governess deteriorating and ultimately may influence her opinion of the children’s psyche. Ultimately, the only true distinguishing factor that the governess can come up with is the simple fact that Quint does not wear a hat (James 48). This fact alone is one which is brought up in her description of Quint and ultimately changes her opinion of him. When the governess first sees Quint in the garden she believes him to be a noble man. It is not until she discusses the man’s attire with Mrs. Grose that she fully understands Quint’s social position and formulates a more solid opinion of him.The governess’s opinion of Quint, which develops after noticing that he wears the master’s clothes, brings her to question other aspects of Quint’s time at Bly. Most notably, his relationship with Miles is often under scrutiny. From the start, the reader is lead to believe that there is more to their relationship than meets the eye. Mrs. Grose enhances this suspicion in her initial description of Quint’s relationship with Miles; she claims that “it was Quint’s own fancy. To play with him…to spoil him” (James 51). She even goes so far as to say that “Quint was much too free” (James 51). The reader’s reaction to this statement is directed by the governess’s response; she reacts to the news with “a sudden sickness of disgust” and proclaims her shock at the revelation (James 51). Still, many scholars debate that the implication that Miles’s engaged in a sexual relationship with Quint because they claim it is based purely on speculation. However, Mrs. Grose again implies an odd nature to their relationship when she tells the governess that “for a period of several months Quint and the boy had been perpetually together” (James 61). The significance of this statement is not fully understood until later in the book when Miles tells the governess that it appears strange “for a fellow to be with a lady always” (James 83). He implies here that spending a great deal of time with one particular person, as he is rumored to have done with Quint, suggests there is a more to the relationship than what is visible on the surface. The fact that Miles immediately jumps to such a conclusion makes his relationship with Quint even more suspect of sexual transgressions. These questions that lie between the lines of Quint’s relationship with Miles are frequently a topic for discussion. However, there is another unusual relationship between Miles and the governess which is even less overt and is often viewed differently by various readers. This relationship lies within brief moments throughout the book when their connection seems to be deeper than their actions initially suggests. Much of Miles’s speech is involved in the odd feelings that the reader develops for his relationship with the governess because it seems abnormally mature for his age. His constant use of the phrase, “my dear,” when addressing the governess is one strange aspect of their relationship because it sounds like the language of one lover to another. This is most apparent during their discussion in the church yard when even the governess notices the peculiarity of his speech. She states, “his ‘my dear’ was constantly on his lips for me, and nothing could have expressed more the exact shade of sentiment with which I desired to inspire in my pupils than its fond familiarity” (James 83). Although her reaction to Miles’s odd tone seems fairly docile, her fondness of his mature speech suggests to the reader, once again, that is more below the surface of their relationship than simple “fond familiarity” (James 83). From the first time the governess meets Miles, she describes him adoringly, analyzing his every feature, “his wonderful smile, the whites of his beautiful eyes and the uncovering of his clear teeth” (James 74). While at times this seems harmless, her descriptions of him sometimes appear peculiar and overly- flattering, forcing the reader to address the possibility that her desires, which were previously directed mainly at the wealthy uncle, are not attractions for a particular person. Rather, the governess may simply desire a man, no matter what the circumstances or what it could cost her.The governess’s desire for a man plays into the underlying story of Miss Jessel’s relationship with Quint. Jessel’s character demonstrates the true price for what is considered sexual promiscuity through her reason for leaving Bly. As the footnote depicts, “the implication is that Miss Jessel left because she was pregnant,” but, she is also subtly cursed by Mrs. Grose for acting upon her sexual desires with Quint (James 59). This reasoning greatly influences the actions of the governess because the knowledge that Jessel’s forbidden relationship cost her everything would force the governess to reconsider acting upon her own desires. Whether these feelings are toward the wealthy uncle, Quint, or Miles, they evoke the same fear in the governess. This fear is perhaps the exact reason that she began to see the ghosts in the first place. As Quint’s first appearance immediately follows her dreaming about the wealthy uncle, it would suffice to say that Quint appears as a reminder of her social position. His appearance in the master’s clothes is a definite implication that Quint’s ghost serves the purpose of reminding the governess of her place in the social order (James 48). Similarly, Miss Jessel reminds the governess that her attraction to Miles is inappropriate and the ghost acts as a window of what is to come if she allows her desires to control her. Henry James, The Turn of the Screw engages in a struggle with sexual identity. Both the governess and Miles find themselves lost in a gray area of their own sexuality. Although for Miles it relates to his relationship with Quint and how that translates into his own sexuality, the governess creates her own hardship through her desire for a sexual identity. While she is eventually attracted to every male that she meets, she still does not accomplish her various goals, from privilege to love. The wealthy uncle indeed presents an opportunity to achieve a higher status, but even in this case, she translates her dream into sexual desire. It is this desire which manifests itself in the ghosts of Peter Quint and Miss Jessel. These two individuals manage to represent everything about the governess that she fears. Quint presses her desire for the wealthy uncle while Jessel questions her adoration for Miles.Works CitedJames, Henry. The Turn of the Screw. 2nd ed. Ed. Peter G. Beidler. Boston: Bedford St. Martin’s, 2004.
A Comparison of the Treatment of Reading and Writing in The Turn of the Screw and The Art of Fiction
Henry James’s novella The Turn of the Screw and his literary essay The Art of Fiction are entirely unalike in form, but contain thoroughly alike themes. Overall, a fascination with the acts of reading and writing is presented; these things are treated as “most beautiful” and are given the greatest of respect by James. However, in this elevation of art and exploration of literature, James sometimes falls back on classist stereotyping and ideology, and suggests that the joy of reading and writing is for a select, privileged few. James presents a high regard for writing in both his essay and his novella.
Throughout The Art of Fiction, James makes lexical choices which significantly elevate the practice. He discusses the novelist Anthony Trollope’s suggestion that fiction is merely “make-believe”; James describes this as a “betrayal”, the legal connotations of which are reinforced by his following assertion that it is “a terrible crime”. The tone of outrage is furthered by the plosive sounds within the metaphor; this indicates a great respect for writing, as James is clearly dismayed at Trollope’s simplification of the art. Additionally, James depicts fiction as “a sacred office”. The religious connotations of the adjective display his ardent reverence and attribute immense power to the art of writing. As French critic Maurice Blanchot notes, James uses similar language to refer to the writing process in his private writings, referring to the “blessed hours” of creation and the “divine light” of plot. These strong feelings were predominantly expressed in the middle and later years of his career, as reflected in The Art of Fiction and The Turn of the Screw – first published in 1884 and 1898, respectively.
The opening of The Turn of the Screw parallels and extends the essay’s veneration of writing, as well as reading. The novella’s opening foregrounds a sense of power in narrative, as the narrator describes how it “held us”, a verb denoting captivation and connoting awe. These states of being are typically assigned to devout Christian worshippers whose attention is wholly focused on the pastor and his sermon. Thus, the first line of the text links to James’s earlier expressed belief that the art of narrative is ‘sacred’. It is also noted in the text that the audience are “sufficiently breathless” – an onomatopoeic phrase, due to the sibilant sounds and soft fricatives – and this suggests they are overcome. The religious imagery related to literature is here extended, as the holding of breath implies an atmosphere of wonder and transcendence. Whilst in both texts James values reading and writing highly, he also acknowledges that the written word is not necessarily moral. In The Art of Fiction, he insists that “the only obligation to which in advance we may hold a novel […] is that it be interesting”, and insinuates that it is “arbitrary” to evaluate a text on the basis of its morality. The Turn of the Screw’s prologue illustrates this point. The character of Douglas is very clear in his warnings that the tale is “quite too horrible”, the intensifier signifying that it should not be told. He stresses the “ugliness and horror and pain” of the story, and the multiple co-ordinating conjunctions create the sense that the awfulness is infinite. Furthermore, he appears to stutter, displaying his distress over the subject, when speaking of the “dreadful – dreadfulness!” However, rather than convincing the audience that they do not wish to hear about it, this heightens their enthusiasm. They agree that it is the horror of the tale that “give[s] the thing the utmost price”, a sentiment which reflects James’s idea – there is nothing that people “ought to like or to dislike” from a moral perspective, there are only preferences and interests. One of the women listening to Douglas’s preamble imagines that the gory details will be “delicious”, not because she lacks concern for the horrors which promise to unfold but because she is one kind of ‘reader’ – one who likes a tale to be “full of incident and movement”, and takes pleasure in mystery. This pre-empts criticism of the novella, as many contemporary reviews of The Turn of the Screw insist that it contains “the very breath of hell” and is “distinctly repulsive”, whilst failing to recognise the merits of the work.
James’s implicit assertions within the novella, and explicit explanations throughout The Art of Fiction, that fiction has the potential to be both wonderful and horrible defends his work from such criticism, which appears basic and incomplete. His insistence that there is “no limit” to literary possibilities – that it is more complex and sophisticated than the simplistic ideas which his critics present – is a subtle but strong demonstration of James’s personal passion for reading and writing. However, the high status James gives to reading and writing – and his disregard for a sense of morality in fiction – is often problematic. In The Turn of the Screw, the elevation renders literature inaccessible to the working-class. Mrs Grose, the only named and living – thus, the representative – working-class character in the novella, is illiterate. She tells the governess that “Such things are not for me, Miss”, a sombre statement which does not merely indicate that she is unable to read, but implies that she is deprived of the privilege of reading. Her body language reinforces this, as she “put[s] her hands behind her” and “shook her head”, both of which are physical symbols of denial. This is undeniably linked to her class, as in Victorian England a lack of financial privilege meant a lack of access to education. Furthermore, the governess is evidently shocked by the revelation that Mrs Grose cannot read, as indicated by the exclamatory nature of her thought “my counsellor couldn’t read!” – which highlights the gulf between their experiences, a result of their different class backgrounds. Although in The Art of Fiction, the exclusion of the working-class is not as explicit as in the novella, James’s grand ideas about literature make it ultimately inaccessible to the working-class. He declares that art “lives upon discussion, upon experiment, upon curiosity, upon variety of attempt, upon the exchange of views and the comparison of standpoints.” The syntactic patterning of this sentence demonstrates that a reader must have multiple talents, as to engage with a text require many attributes. The abstract nouns ‘discussion’, ‘experiment’, and ‘curiosity’ are particularly striking, forming a semantic field of scholarliness which suggests that this is a pursuit for those who have been well-educated, and who have the time to enjoy such activities. Therefore, the image of a reader, as created by James, omits the working-class.
The common thread running through James’s work is the unadulterated admiration for fiction, in both the processes of reading and writing. He is aware – as a writer himself – of the complexities of creating a piece of literature, and so is able to appreciate the art immensely. Unfortunately, his expression of appreciation frequently relies on the exclusion of the working-class, as he assumes a reader must possess certain skills – such skills that require access to an education unaffordable to many. Although the financial barriers to education which Mrs Grose in The Turn of the Screw faced are no longer quite as acute, the inherently classist system remains an issue over 100 years later – the exclusivity of knowledge which James demonstrates is not as removed from the modern situation as many readers might believe.
 Henry James, The Turn of the Screw (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999), p. 2  Henry James, ‘The Art of Fiction’ in The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism, ed. by Vincent B. Leitch (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2010), pp. 744 – 759 (p. 746)  James, p. 746  Maurice Blanchot, ‘The Turn of the Screw’ in The Turn of the Screw, ed. by Deborah Esch (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999), pp. 186 – 191 (p. 189)  James, p. 1  James, p. 1  James, p. 748  James, p. 1  James, p. 2  James, p. 2  James, p. 1  James, p. 754  James, p. 12  James, p. 747  The New York Times, ‘Magic of Evil and Love’ in The Turn of the Screw, ed. by Deborah Esch (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999), p. 149  The Outlook, ‘The Story Is Distinctly Repulsive’ in The Turn of the Screw, ed. by Deborah Esch (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1999), p. 151  James, p. 748  James, p. 10  James, p. 10  James, p. 10  James, p. 745
Silences in The Turn of the Screw
‘Silence’ in Henry James’ The Turn of the Screw is integral to the text not only in a literal sense, but also figuratively; the gaps that are purposefully left in the plot and the reader’s knowledge also act, powerfully, as “silences”. Whilst literal, aural silences provide an atmospheric tone in James’ novel, it is the metaphorical, textual silences that take precedence, sitting at the centre of the book.
James purposefully implements such gaps, and stubbornly refuses to fill them. It is, consequently the reader’s task to take these silences on, guided by markers in the text. In “The Turn of the Screw”, the gaps left unfilled by James have been under constant critical debate since the novel’s first publication, culminating in a vast array of diverse interpretations of the tale; testament to the effectiveness of these silences. It is the reader’s straying imagination that fills the gaps, naturally led by the horrifying implications James provides for them.
One of the major ‘silences’ central to the novel as a whole is a product of James’ layered narrative, where, as Anthony Mazella comments, “the governess’ manuscript is mediated through Douglas’s transcription and editing,” with an additional narrator at the opening of the novel recounting Douglas’s telling of the tale. Naturally, such a narrative leaves gaps in the novel. The reader, for instance, never discovers Douglas’s relationship towards the governess, the identity of the initial narrator, or indeed very much information about the governess herself, her being nameless throughout. Additionally, the framing of the governess’s narrative within another, told some time after the events of hers had taken place, “it has not been out for years,” creates a gap or ‘silence’ in those years which the reader never learns about, creating a marked distance from the primary tale. What this achieves is in a dissimulation of “an origin, and thus a fixed point of reference for the story,” as Shoshana Felman argues, implementing a structural silence which causes the reader to question the plausibility of the governess’s narrative entirely.
Additionally, there occurs a literal ‘silence’ at the close of the novel, in the sense that the framing narrative does not return after the death of Miles. This runs contrary to the reader’s expectations of a framing narrative. As in novels with a similar Chinese-box structure such as Wuthering Heights, the structure is circular and returns to Lockwood’s narration at the end. Because of this silence at the end of the novel, a jarring effect occurs, where, as Richard Rust comments, “the horror is accentuated by the undermining of the frame structure itself, something we counted on to provide control.”
However, there here arises the question in this instance of whether this effective ‘silence’ ‘refuses’ to be filled, as Claire Seymour has suggested. It is the reader’s own ‘horror’ at the end of the novel which one could imagine would undoubtedly be shared with that of the group being told the same story, were they to appear once more. Thus, while the absence of the framing narrative at the end of the novel is a silence, it is one that is in theory, ‘filled’ by the reader’s own horror.
The governess in the novel may also be thought of as a generator of silences throughout the text. These lie both in her refusals and hesitancy to communicate as well as her withholding of information; the latter being a very literal kind of silence. For instance, the governess frequently hesitates to ask either Flora or Miles outright whether or not they have seen the apparitions of Quint or Miss Jessel, instead making assured assumptions that they have, telling Mrs. Grose for instance that although Flora did not say “a word” at the lake about seeing Miss Jessel, the governess is certain that “she saw,” though the truth of this is left ambiguous to the reader.
Another of the major instances in which the governess upholds her silence is in her lack of correspondence with the master, or the children’s uncle. Even upon receiving an expulsion letter from Miles’s school, she claims to have “made up her mind” to say “nothing” to the master. It is possible, as claimed by Douglas at the opening of the novel, that the governess is infatuated or even in love with the master, and the ghosts that these willful ‘silences’ are a bravado attempt to avoid disappointing the master. However, critic Thomas J. Bontley suggests that the governess sees the ghosts of Quint and Miss Jessel as “a personal challenge to her chosen role as defender of innocence,” an idea which suggests that her refusal to break or ‘fill’ the silence on Miss Jessel or Quint with the children is her own desperate attempt to shield them from the apparitions: “I was a screen- I was to stand before them. The more I saw the less they would.”
The literal, aural silences in “The Turn of the Screw” often occur in the presence of the ghosts or in the moments leading up to their appearance to the governess. In one instance, the governess actually comments that “It was the dead silence of our long gaze at such close quarters that gave the whole horror, huge as it was, its only note of the unnatural.” Indeed, this comment on it being solely the silence lending a tone of the ‘unnatural’ seems representative of the book in its entirety; it is the silences or gaps that James refuses to fill that instill the most horror. It is also possible however, that the governess’s encounters with the ghosts being entirely silent is indicative of her own madness or hallucination. One critic, Thomas J. Bontley suggests that the “[the governess’] horror must be seen as a result of her own intense vision of sexual evil.” In other words, because the governess is aware of Miss Jessel and Quint’s illicit sexual affair whilst living, she sees them as symbols of sexuality and thus a corrupting force which it is her utmost role to protect the children from.
This idea brings us neatly onto another ‘silence’ central to the novel which lies in implication and unspoken tension, in the form of sex and sexuality. Silenced both by the real Victorian world lying outside the book’s bounds and reinforced within the governess desperately attempts to prevent the children from being “corrupted,” encompassing in her character traditional Victorian values about sex and sexuality. The silence surrounding sex in the novel manifests itself symbolically through particular images and subtle nudges towards the subject. Quint, for instance, first appears to the governess atop the ‘old tower,’ an imposing phallic image which again combines the inherently evil supernatural with sex, and as Bontly phrases it, “evil is given actuality in actual ghosts, and is explicitly associated with human sexuality.” Thus, whilst sex within the novel is a ‘silence’ in the sense that it is not written about explicitly, yet again the reader is invited to ‘fill’ the gap with the implications James peppers throughout the novel.
Victorian ghost stories such as James’ The Turn of the Screw often used silences both literal and metaphorical for the intended goal of horrifying or scaring the reader, a tradition which has retained its power over time, found in modern ghost stories as well as horror films; it is often commented that the most ‘scary’ horror films are the ones where the ‘evil’ is not, or barely ever present, and thus a ‘gap’ or ‘silence’ in the story. “The Turn of the Screw” is no exception to this rule. The novel’s power rests upon the aural, implied, and textual silences at the heart of the novel which lie deafeningly open to the reader’s imagination. It is the reader’s own fears, those that they bring to the book themselves, that fill these open holes. As James himself so aptly put it of his readers: “his own experience, his own imagination, his own sympathy […] and horror […] will supply him quite sufficiently with all the particulars.”