Introduction
In 1898, American-born British author published a short novel, a novella, which is still causing a great deal of academic debate today. A Turn of the Screw is essentially a simple ghost story. It begins at a fireside among a group of friends who are sharing ghost stories with each other. One man introduces his story, but drags out the suspense by indicating that he has to send away for the written statements of a woman he once knew and who had died some years before with no explanation as to what caused her death. The story that he tells is supposedly her story from a time when she was employed as a governess to care for an orphaned boy and girl at her employer’s country estate without ever bothering the employer, their uncle, at all. The children are Miles, a ten-year-old boy who has been expelled from his boarding school for bad behavior just as the governess begins to take up her new duties, and Flora, an eight-year-old girl who is simply presented as a heavenly child. As soon as the governess arrives, she makes close friends with the housekeeper, Mrs. Grose, who is a simple country woman and hesitates to correct her betters in any way. Although both children seem angelic, the governess begins to see two additional people on the property that she quickly identifies as the master’s old valet Peter Quint and the children’s previous governess Ms. Jessel. These people are suggested to have been very wicked people who spent most of their time with the children before they each died strange and mysterious deaths. As she learns more of the story, the current governess begins to think the children are in league with the ghosts, but no one else in the story ever directly acknowledges that they see apparitions even when the governess is directing their gaze. In the end, the governess sends the ill Flora away from the house in the company of Mrs. Grose as she attempts to confront Miles about the ghosts. As the story comes to a climax and Miles seems on the verge of finally confirming or denying his knowledge of the ghosts, he dies with no clear explanation as to why. The story ends with numerous questions still circling through the reader’s mind and the realization that they will never be truly satisfied. Throughout the novel, James adheres to a strictly ambiguous approach that has generated widespread debate regarding just what, if anything, the story is intended to convey.
Ambiguity
Ambiguity is the defining characteristic of the novella. There is uncertainty regarding the identity of the man telling the story, there is ambiguity regarding the identity of the woman who supposedly first made the story available to him and there is ambiguity regarding how she died at a relatively young age. James does not make a clear distinction between the unnamed narrator at the beginning of the story and the beginning of the governess’s narration and this is just the start. According to Oxford University Press Philosophy Dictionary, the term ‘ambiguity’ refers to anything “having more than one meaning” (“Ambiguity”, 2005). Lexical ambiguity refers to situations in which “a single term has two meanings” while structural ambiguity refers to a case in which “a sentence or grammatically complex construction can be ambiguous without any of the words in it being so” (“Ambiguity”, 2005). An example of ambiguity within the story comes when the governess and Mrs. Gross are discussing the letter that has come from the school informing the house of Miles’ expulsion. As she explains what the letter means to Mrs. Grose, the governess says it “can have but one meaning … that he’s an injury to the others” (James 17). There are several ways in which the term injury might be interpreted including physical, mental or psychological damage inflicted upon others deliberately, these same things inflicted accidentally or the simple dislike others might feel toward a small boy more intelligent and more appealing than the others (jealousy). By using these kinds of terms that can have more than one meaning, and allowing his characters to cut off their sentences before any clarity of meaning is achieved, James is able to convey the sense of a story without providing any clear meaning within the story.
The First Debate
Early critics of the story focused on the ambiguity of the characters – specifically whether the ghosts were actually there or not. This has had the effect of dividing critics according to two different camps. These are now referred to as the apparitionist and non-apparitionist approaches. These terms are described by Edward Parkinson as they are used within his own work. “I use the term apparitionist to refer to interpretations in which the ghosts are seen as real – i.e. veridical apparitions or manifestations of some paranormal reality existing independently of the governess’s subjective apprehension” (Parkinson, 2007). In other words, apparitionists approach the story with the assumption that the ghosts are real and separate from the governess’s imagination. Whether or not any of the other characters are able to see them and what this might mean to the overall story thus becomes the topic of discussion. The other term, non-apparitionist, is used “to refer to interpretations in which the ghosts are viewed as non-veridical, merely subjective hallucinations of the governess” (Parkinson, 2007). In this case, it is assumed that the ghosts are not real and are just figments of the governess’s imagination and the ‘evidence’ she sees in the behavior of the children regarding the ghosts’ existence is equally figments of the governess’s imagination. From this perspective, motives are sought as to why the governess might find it necessary to invent such apparitions and why it has the effect it does upon the two children. Because of the way James wrote the story, each interpretation is equally valid while Parkinson indicates that this terminology as a means of referring to these two approaches are relatively standard within academic circles.
Apparitionist approach
There is a great deal of evidence to suggest James intended this story to be interpreted as a ghost story. According to Anne Willis (2009), “throughout his career James was attracted to the ghost story genre. However, he was not fond of literature’s stereotypical ghosts, the old-fashioned ‘screamers’ and ‘slashers.’ Rather, he preferred to create ghosts that were eerie extensions of everyday reality – ‘the strange and sinister embroidered on the very type of the normal and easy’ as he put it.” This would encourage him to create a different kind of ghost than the stereotypical representations of his time and still consider them as actually appearing within the novel while also being astute enough to allow the mystery of the characters to drive interest in his story. Other clues exist that James intended the story to function as a popular ghost story. For example, there is a consistent reference throughout the story to the gothic elements of the property of Bly such as in the architecture of the building. “This tower was one of a pair – square incongruous crenellated structures … They flanked opposite ends of the house and were probably architectural absurdities, redeemed in a measure indeed by not being wholly disengaged nor of a height too pretentious, dating, in their gingerbread antiquity, from a romantic revival that was already a respectable past” (James 25). Upon first seeing the ghost of Quint standing on the older of these two towers, the governess asks, “Was there a secret at Bly – a mystery of Udolpho or an insane, an unmentionable relative kept in unsuspected confinement?” (James 28). The Mysteries of Udolpho was a book produced in the late 1700s that is largely recognized as being the prime example of the gothic novel and is characterized by the torment of a young girl by supernatural elements that only come to an end when she is able to take control over her responsibilities, namely her inheritance (Webber, 2008). However, even with all the clues that James intended for the story to be considered a modern ghost story, he also provides a sense of a more prosaic explanation for the governess’s visions with the allusion to Bertha in Charlotte Bronte’s novel Jane Eyre (Kaufmann, 1986). In this story, the character Bertha was the insane first wife of Mr. Rochester who is kept hidden and confined in the attic of his country manor house. Through this suggestion, James opens the door for the non-apparitionists and reinforces the concept of ambiguity in the text.
Non-apparitionist approach
The non-apparitionist approach is generally acknowledged to have started with a book critic for the New Yorker named Edmund Wilson. In an essay he wrote in 1934 entitled “The Ambiguity of Henry James,” Wilson describes a number of secret motives found within the text that would encourage the governess to hallucinate the ghosts, mostly centered upon Sigmund Freud’s ideas of sexual repression. This is suggested in the way that the governess evidently falls in love with her employer nearly on the spot, quickly agreeing to do anything for him if he simply requests it of her and determined to see it through as a means of proving herself worthy of his regard. Her continued obsession with this idea appears even late in the story when she describes how she and the children would pretend, at times, that he would come to visit or to write. “He never wrote to them – that may have been selfish, but it was a part of the flattery of his trust of myself; for the way in which a man pays his highest tribute to a woman is apt to be but by the more festal celebration of one of the sacred laws of his comfort” (James 87). The non-apparitionist argument holds that the repressed sexual feelings the governess has for her unattainable employer are manifested in the ‘infamous’ sexual deviants of her predecessor and her lover as they seek to claim the souls of the angelic children that have been placed in her care as if they were truly hers. One of the major challenges to this approach is found in the detail with which the governess describes the appearance of Quint to Mrs. Grose to such extent that Mrs. Grose is able to immediately recognize who she is describing. However, later arguments were developed to meet this challenge. Specifically, it is pointed out that Quint’s physical appearance isn’t described to any great detail in spite of a stated clarity of vision upon the first time the governess sees him and she doesn’t mention him to the housekeeper until after she has had a chance to make inquiries within the village and would have likely heard about both him and the former governess while there. These ideas were brought forward by John Silver in 1937 and were used to support Wilson’s claims regarding the ‘crazy governess’ theory, but is quite shaky evidence on which to support an entire argument.
Focusing on the governess leans toward non-apparitionist interpretation
Whether one takes the apparitionist approach or the non-apparitionist approach thus has a great deal to do with how the book is understood and is typically determined based upon one’s understanding of the character of the governess. An analysis of the character of the governess generally tends to lead toward a non-apparitionist approach regardless of attempts to view the ghosts as real. This is because of the way in which her character is revealed. There are numerous hints provided throughout the text that she is the insane character of the bunch as she attempts to fill some of the emptiness she feels as a result of her role. It is, for example, notable that the story is told by the governess herself, and thus is filtered through the lens of her own observations and self-interest at portraying herself as an admirable person. In spite of this, she is sent into the world as a young woman to fend for herself after having received a barely adequate education for the role she is expected to fulfill (the 10-year-old boy is ahead of her in his studies) and is shipped off immediately to a remote country location where she is expected to remain forever celibate as an example to her pupils. Even though she is expected to take up the full duties of mother and father in this role, she is still considered little more than a servant and is thus outranked by her students removing any authority she might have and she is likely to be tossed aside without a thought once the children are grown enough to no longer require her services. It was Virginia Woolf who pointed out the extreme silence of Bly, in which everything from the calls of the birds to the laughter of the children is heard as from far away (Woolf, 1921). This silence and distance are considered to be indications of the extreme isolation the governess feels as she takes up her post and which was a common condition of her station. There are many other servants present at Bly, including several maids, a gardener, a stable hand and others, but the only one that has a high enough station in the house to associate even somewhat comfortable with the governess is the housekeeper. Too high class and educated to associate with servants and yet also a servant herself and thus not able to associate with the gentry, the governess existed in a state of perpetual limbo and uncertainty. Within this void, it seems only human nature that the individual would need to assert herself in some way.
It is this self-absorption of the character that provides the clue to her inner insanity as she inadvertently, and brilliantly through the pen of the author, exposes her own lies. The exaggeration of her own goodness is seen early on as the governess arrives at a home much finer than anything she had yet experienced and describes her welcome as if she were the new mistress of the house. “There immediately appeared at the door, with a little girl in her hand, a civil person who dropped me as decent a curtsey as if I had been the mistress or a distinguished visitor” (James 11). This feeds into her fantasy, started with her meeting with the wealthy bachelor, that she might have a much more glorious and exciting future. Her thoughts are again supported when she is introduced to her new quarters, “the large impressive room, one of the best in the house, the great state bed, as I almost felt it, the figured full draperies, the long glasses in which, for the first time, I could see myself from head to foot, all struck me … as so many wonderful things thrown in” (James 11). Within this simple description, the governess reveals not only her own humble upbringing in her assessment of the room and her excitement over the full-length mirrors, but also in her exaggeration of the bed size and focus on the draperies. As she meets the other members of the house, she also includes a great deal of self-congratulation and confidence in her ability to charm others, something upon which she must rely if she is to become secure in her new place. She is constantly congratulating herself on the various ways in which she has done well, such as when she describes her behavior upon receiving the expulsion letter from Miles’ school. In determining what to do about the situation, she describes herself with glowingly positive terms – “I was incisive … I was wonderful” (James 22). Through this kind of language, the governess reveals her own deep insecurity and the strong need she feels to make herself essentially important to the working of the house no matter what she needs to do to convince herself this is true.
This false self-confidence is particularly evident in her relationships with others. Upon first meeting the housekeeper, the governess decides that they will have a great friendship marred only by the necessary niceties required as a result of their differences in social position. “I felt within half an hour that [Mrs. Grose] was so glad – stout simple plain clean wholesome woman – as to be positively on her guard against showing it too much. I wondered even then a little why she should wish not to show it” (James 11). This reticence on the part of the housekeeper becomes more troubling to the reader later in the story as it becomes clear that the governess must always seek her out and interrupt Mrs. Grose in her chores, to which Mrs. Grose always seems anxious to return. While the governess seems to think this is simply dedication and prudence on the part of the housekeeper, the reader begins to wonder at this avoidant behavior and to notice how often the housekeeper raises doubts regarding the governess’s assumptions. She never agrees with the governess that the children could have any of the dark deceits the governess sees in them and she never noticed anything out of place regarding the ghosts. This same overconfidence in her behavior is expressed by the governess regarding the children. She discusses how devoted they are to her, how interested they are in anything to do with her life but how they never talked about their own and how, after she started seeing the ghosts, she ensured they were always together as she attempted to place herself, heroically, between the children and the devils that were trying to claim them. However, again there are hints that things are not quite as the governess describes as the children seem constantly contriving to give each other breaks from her attentions for a time. “The children clearly are engaged in humoring the governess, just as she says that she suspects, but for motives entirely explicable by her strangeness, and it is testimony to the completeness of her self-engagement that even as she suspects, she takes comfort in what she insists is the affection Miles and Flora have for her” (Klein, 2007). Rather than believing herself the cause of the problem, the governess turns to the explanation of the ghosts, and the children’s involvement with them, as an explanation for the strangeness in the air.
Understanding these elements of the governess, it seems clear that whether the ghosts are real or not, the governess clearly has a reason to believe in them as they become manifestations of her own repressed desires. Wilson points out that the first time the governess sees Peter Quint, it is as she is taking a solitary walk in the evening and thinking about the bachelor of Harley Street (1948). Miss Jessel easily slides in to become the present governess’s alter ego, free in death to pursue the passions and desires the present governess can only work to suppress. This sexual link is made through innuendo as Mrs. Grose unwillingly divulges the reputation of these two characters while they lived. Mrs. Grose responds to the governess’s accusation that “he was a hound” by suggesting that “he did what he wished” (James 53). Understanding that Quint would often disappear for hours at a time with the boy while Miss Jessel disappeared with the girl, the governess assumes the two of them had been together in a romantic tryst that the children were asked to lie about, thus involving innocents in their depravity. From this conclusion, she then makes the confession that this “must have been also what she wished” (James 53). The danger in making such a statement is made clear in the earlier allusion to Bronte’s Bertha. “Bertha is considered insane because of her intense sensuality. Bertha is represented as a sort of taboo sexuality that is forbidden to the others” (Crookston, 1999). Her sudden and unexplained tendency to grab the children and cover them with kisses as well as her strange obsession to be with them at all times are manifestations of her own sensuality as even the governess begins to recognize that her behavior is crossing over into the realm of insanity.
Conclusion
While an examination of the governess’s character does not relieve any of the ambiguity of the novel, it does suggest a number of interesting possibilities for the actions of the other characters and reveals a level of human understanding unsuspected in the story. In many ways, the novella raises more questions than it provides answers as every element is permitted to retain at least two possible interpretations. This aspect of the work has been demonstrated in the literature that has been produced in response to it either falling in support of the real presence of supernatural beings or in support of the concept that the narrator of the story simply hallucinated these beings into existence. While these debates have been carried on ever since the story was first published, they have not been resolved to any definite conclusion. However, as one takes a closer look at the character of the governess herself, the character who tells the story and is thus in complete control over what is told, it is difficult to avoid leaning to the idea that the ghosts were more a figment of this character’s imagination as a means of providing herself with importance and meaning beyond the hollow shell of a life she was permitted to lead as a result of her position in society. This is supported by what is known about the role of the governess in general as it really existed in Victorian times as well as by what is known about the insecurities and immature fantasies of the young governess.
Works Cited
“Ambiguity.” The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Bronte, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1899.
Crookston, Beth. “Bertha Mason: The Enigma.” (1999). Kent State University.
James, Henry. The Turn of the Screw. New York: Tom Doherty Associates Book, 1993.
Kauffman, Linda S. Discourses of Desire: Gender, Genre, and Epistolary Fictions. Cornell University Press, 1986.
Parkinson, Edward J. The Turn of the Screw: A History of its Critical Interpretations 1898-1979. (2007). Web.
Silver, John. “A Note on the Freudian Reading of the Turn of the Screw.” American Literature. Vol. 29, 1957: 207-211.
Webber, Caroline. “The Mysteries of Udolpho.” The Literary Encyclopedia. (2008). Web.
Willis, Anne. “Book Discussion.” Victoria’s Messenger. Falls Church, VA, (2009). Web.
Wilson, Edmund. “The Ambiguity of Henry James.” The Triple Thinkers. New York: 1948.