|
|
|
|
"It's impossible not to--"
"--love him?"
|
| | 5 | 12/11/2011 6:24 PM | I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THE GHOSTS ARE REAL OR NOT. ...this isn't a substantial post, this book is just frustrating and I'm tired. | |
| | 0 | 12/11/2011 6:20 PM | Oh, Displacement After revisiting the novel for the paper we had to write, I began to more clearly understand some of the psychological struggles the Governess had, including her displacement of affection for a man onto the children. Since there was no masculine figure in the lonely house, and the employer rarely, the Governess subconsciously displaced her emotions of love and lust onto the care of the Innocent children, somewhat transforming her passionate love into a motherly love. | |
| | 8 | 12/11/2011 1:47 PM | Miles Adult Why does Miles act like a man instead of a boy? I find this the creepiest part of the book. He keeps calling the governess 'dear' and after Flora leaves they take their dinner together and then sit together in silence, not at all what a 10 year old boy would do. He doesn't seem rambunctious or loud. He speaks eloquently and he is quite as adept as the governess at skirting around subjects and being ambiguous, adult conversation skills. Additionally, the governess calls him 'little master'. I'm wondering if this was how Miles actually acted and why. Could this be how the governess remembers him, but with embroidery regarding his deportment and terms of endearment towards her? Is it some product of his upbringing, that something happened to transform or warp him into behaving like a adult? I don't think he is possessed in the modern sense of the word. I think that the governess is remembering the boy different than how he actually was. | |
| | 9 | 11/6/2011 2:14 PM | Title
So, since everybody (should) have the book finished, I think it is a good time to revisit the title of the novel. It was mentioned at the end of the prologue, and once later on in the book, I think Chapter XXII. I think of it meaning the tightening of tension, but that interpretation is fairly basic. I thought having it mentioned in the prologue would foreshadow, but what did is foreshadow exactly? I assume there is a deeper or metaphorical meaning solely because it is the title, so it is important by default. Another theory I have is that is means turning a screw into somebody to get a confession, which in this case would be the governess trying to get Miles and Flora admitting their consorting with the ghosts. However, I don’t have too much proof or support… Any suggestions or new ideas? | |
| | 3 | 11/6/2011 10:15 AM | Class Discussions So, during our class discussion we've had a jolly good time bashing the governess. We've talked all about how she is yelling at children and how stupid she is. I'm not attempting to justify her actions, but I think there is a bit more of a psychological piece to this book other than her just being a mean crazy person.
1. What if the ghosts are real? What if the children are lying, are corrupt. I'm am not saying they are, but if this is a possibility, isn't the governess's paranoia valid. She would be alone and isolated dealing with supernatural powers and demon children.
2. She thinks the ghosts are real. If this is the case, she obviously has something going wrong in her mind. So is it really fair for us to say "SHE'S A HORRIBLE STUPID WOMAN WHO YELLS AT CHILDREN AND IS AWFUL!" if she has something genuinely wrong with her? Even if it's not like a chemical imbalance, and she's just wrapped up in a psychological episode, her actions are justified in her mind. SHE thinks she's doing the right thing. I'd like to discuss more about WHY she would act this way or what's wrong with her, rather than just calling her stupid. | |
| | 7 | 11/2/2011 4:57 PM | Psychoanalyzing Mrs. Grose To me, the most unsettling part of Turn of the Screw was the ending of chapter 21. When the Governess is sending Flora away and she plans on making Miles confess, and Mrs. Grose says "I'll save you without him!" This is so very creepy to me. I know we all have been focusing our psychoanalysis on the Governess and the children, but I think we need to focus on Mrs. Grose. I am so curious about her devotion to the Governess. How come Mrs. Grose even believes her in the first place ? When the Governess claims to see Miss Jessel it's clear that Mrs. Grose sees nothing. I'm wondering if Mrs. Grose is just as crazy as the Governess and will do anything to keep the "special bond" they seemed to form almost immediately, even if that means sacrificing the children. | |
| | 20 | 10/30/2011 1:00 PM | *SPOILERS* The governess raped, and then killed, Miles.
I mean really. Miles offers his "supreme surrender" and "tribute to [her] devotion" after which the governess cries " I have you" launches herself at "the beast" (when did Miles become a beast?) and demonstrates her work . Then she holds him with an passion as he dies.
If we see it in this light, the governess's obsession with the "purity" of the children, and simultaneous inability to directly confront them about it, becomes much clearer. She needed to know if they were a good little boy and girl before she destroyed their innocence herself. Child molesters aren't interested in used goods. It wasn't about saving the kids, it was about making sure that Quint and Jessel hadn't ruined them completely before she got her teeth into them.
creepy as all get out.
.png) | |
| | 4 | 10/30/2011 12:46 PM | What the ghosts REALLY are Ok guys, this is going to follow a semi-logical sequence:
One thing we discussed on Friday was the idea of a werewolf, how a werewolf symbolizes a man's internal id escaping, his wild wolf coming out and rampaging as a beast.
We also talked about vampires and how vampires have heavy connotations of sexual urges and desires.
So here is what I think:
the ghosts, far from being true menaces from the devil, or even imaginings of the governess are actually symbols that are appearing to her because she has repressed herself.
They are important both as manifestations of sexual repression and of her internal anxiety over her authority position.
1. The governess admits many times to being "carried away" by the man who hires her. The first time she see's Quint, she is walking through the garden's imagining how it would be to stroll through them with a man besides her: and then a man-like figure appears atop the phallic, brooding tower. There is also the matter of her obssession with miles, the diction and actions that accompany that, you know all the creepily sexual/pseudopedo language she uses. Kate has adequetly discussed that I think. This textual evidence, coupled with the time period of Victorianism (wherein all sexual or fleshy desires were irredeemable sins) leads me to believe that the governess is sexually repressed, her hormones have been held in too tight of constraits.
2. The governess repeatedly tells us that she "was in the sole position of authority" that she "alone, ruled the house". While these stand as justifications for her actions, they also betray an anxiety over her place as a leader in the house. This is the first time she has had so much control in her life, after living as a girl under control of her father, and soon to (hopefully) live under control of a man, she is now in control of an entire household. She is understandably nervous, frightened of doing something terribly wrong.
3. Now, the matter of the ghosts. Who are the ghosts? The former manservant and governess, two figures who were previously in positions of authority and who sexually abused the children. They have committed the two crimes the governess is repressing: sexual gratification and failure in duty. Moreover, they abused their charges: the very people they, and she are supposed to protect and who both they and she will ultimately fail in protecting. In addition, the governess and manservant stand as rivals in the affections of the man of the house and of the children: an issue of jealousy arises.
4. So what does that mean? It could very well mean that the ghosts are the governesses subconcious throwing up what i fears and represses: sexuality and failure of duty: in a compact package, where the two are linked. The ghosts aren't real OR imaginary. They represent the very real but psychological issues the governess has. They, like the supernatural werewolf or vampire, are not really ghostsin a woooowooooo sense. They are ghosts in the sense that they are the errors and fears that we hold in our subconcious, they are the echos of what we have repressed in our id. The governess tried to separate good and evil. But evil inside her just came round to bite her in her ass, just like Jung said. So if werewolfs are the beasts within, vampires the sexuality resisted, then maybe ghosts are the repressions realized, brought forth as shadowy beings from our subconcious. | |
| | 6 | 10/30/2011 12:31 PM | The Movie Scene While watching a few scenes from the movie in class, it really put everything in perspective. When I read the book I thought Miles was a creepy kid, but in the movie he didn't really seem that weird to me. Also, in the movie, the governess seemed more crazy than she was in the book. When you see this woman sceaming at a 9 year old boy and begging him to tell his "secret" it really made her seem insane. Half the time Miles didn't know what she was talking about, and when the governess saw the ghost in the end and was yelling, Miles died of fright. The end was upsetting, and really want to know if the ghosts were real or just in the governess's head. | |
| | 0 | 10/30/2011 11:50 AM | I'm confused I'm confused....if we are believing that the molesting idea is incorrect, then how did he die? Did he suffocate? Mr. Chiz said not to think of it at a plot standpoint, but I'm confused how we are supposed to think about it. If we are supposed to look under the text, then how would suffocation be considered a non plot interpreation? | |
| | 0 | 10/30/2011 11:47 AM | THE GHOSTS ARE REAL! Everyone keeps asking if the ghosts are real or not. I don't believe that this is the point of the book. Maybe plot wise, but not even that. The point of the novel is not to find out if the governess is seeing things because the children are proving that they are there. The argument could be made that the governess is a physco crazy llady who is paranoid about everything, but the children seem to acknowledge the ghosts, and who would the children have been talking to if there were no ghosts? | |
| | 10 | 10/30/2011 11:43 AM | Scary? Not really. Before we started reading this book, Mr. Chiz made it out to be super mindblowingly scary. I didnt find that in this book. I felt that it was a decent storyline with all of the typical twists and turns that your typical ghost story has. Maybe it is because today we have so many freaky new horror films and scary movies/stories are so common that I just am not lookig into the novel enough, who knows. But if anyone got what Mr. Chisnell was puttin down please help! | |
| | 9 | 10/30/2011 11:28 AM | The Governess ain't so psycho. While I was reading this, I couldn't help but find that the governess is like a lot of female leads in teen fiction. There isn't a whole lot of personality there. She questions everything and does absolutely nothing that makes sense to the reader. Things are over-dramatized and she idolizes something and allows it to consume her (in this case, the children). I was trying to figure out why this would be. Why would James write such an empty character? Is there a purpose for the governess being such a one dimensional dolt? | |
| | 3 | 10/30/2011 8:55 AM | indirect I feel like a lot of things in this novel are indirect. Not just the governess worrying about Miles and Flora being potentially corrupted,as I mentioned before, but many other things. For example, whenever the governess comes in contact with Quint or Miss Jessel, she never actually directly speaks to them. She often just has an intense gaze upon them and claims she knows what they were saying. When she saw Miss Jessel outside, she claimed that her gaze was saying that she had a right to be there, although she never actually talked to her. | |
| | 4 | 10/29/2011 11:05 PM | After all of that, no final reaction? Although the story is told from the Governess' point of view, I find it interesting and shocking that we never know what her reaction is to Miles' death. She doesn't get the last word after 24 chapters of narrating. I know this goes against new criticism, what what do you guys think her reaction is to Miles' death? Was she truly in love with him and is now in despair? Was Miles the only person left to convince her that she wasn't crazy and now that he's gone, she's more worried about her sanity than his life? I'm thinking that she didn't get the last word because of her dependence on this 10 year old. Now that he's gone forever, she doesn't know what to do. She can't finish her investigation since Miles was the only one who had the answers to if he saw the ghosts and why he got expelled from school. Connecting with our class discussion on Erikson, Chisnell said that those who are controlling can be insecure about themselves and take it out on others. Now that Miles is gone on along with Flora and Mrs. Grose, who's left for her to control? | |
| | 6 | 10/29/2011 10:06 PM | She wants to "save" tham? So i'm pretty sure we have all agreed that the governess is justifiing her actions, by saying she wants to save the children and save herself. But from what exactly? Forcing a potentially false confession out of two small children, wont save them from any dangers that might wait within these ghosts. Just wondering what you guys think.
Personally, i think it could be related to a confession to save one's soul. These ghosts are obviously not of a holy nature, and could be defined as the devils work. Maybe confessing that they see them instead of keeping secret and even intereacting iwith these ghosts, could save their eternal soul. I know that religion isn't directly brought up in the text, but we do see the governess and the children going to church, and ghosts and demons are typically brought up as being hellish. | |
| | 8 | 10/29/2011 9:44 PM | Governess' Intentions Okay so I'm a little confused on the governess' intentions. Do you think that she truthfully has the children's best interests in mind or do you think she is just trying to look good to their uncle? Or do you think that she could just be trying to figure out this mystery for her own benefit in order to expel the ghosts from the house so she can rest easy? | |
| | 5 | 10/29/2011 8:27 PM | The Ship and the Sea While the symbol of the ship portrayed early in the novel confuses me somewhat, I have some ideas as to its meaning. Its vast open seaway could represent a great emptiness the governess feels, and how she is worried she cannot find the correct path in her life. The dark waters could also be foreboding to what lies ahead for her and the children, and also represents dark thoughts that haunt her mind. | |
| | 4 | 10/29/2011 8:23 PM | approaching problems indirectly I found it very odd that the governess took every problem so indirectly. She never was worried about Miles and Flora being harmed in a physical way, like being killed, she was only worried about them being corrupted. She was worrying about what might happen to them mentally. She was their protector and the one responsible for them so I feel like she should have been worried about their physical condition too. | |
| | 6 | 10/29/2011 8:19 PM | Horrific Language Throughout much of the first section of the book, I've been noticing that James uses quiet a bit of horrific language when describing otherwise normal occurrences. He speaks of people as "creatures", describes many as "monstrous". This creepy diction is a pretty cheesy way of adding tension to the plot. Its almost like adding scary music to a section in a horror film where nothing scary is happening. I see it as an unnecessary effect, but maybe others would place more value in it as some sort of motif. | |
| | 8 | 10/29/2011 8:07 PM | "Well-I said things" (SPOILER) SPOILER, read replies for post. | |
| | 3 | 10/29/2011 8:04 PM | The end of Chapter 17 Sooo, SPOILER IF YOU HAVEN'T READ UP TO CH 17
The end of chapter seventeen confused me so much. I haven't read very much past it yet but I just don't understand what happened at all. I'll quote the part I'm confused about
"The answer to my appeal was instantaneous, but it came in the form of an extraordinary blast and chill, a gust of frozen air, and a shake of the room as great as if, in the wild wind, the casement had crashed in. The boy gave a loud, high shriek, which, lost in the rest of the shock of sound, might have seemed, indistinctly, though I was so close to him, a note either of jubilation or of terror. I jumped to my feet again and was conscious of darkness. So for a moment we remained, while I stared about me and saw that the drawn curtains were unstirred and the windows tight. 'Why, the candle's out !' I then cried.
'It was I who blew it, dear !'" Said Miles.
OKAY SO ! This to me suggest either, Miles blew out the candle so that The Governess wouldn't see whatever it was, orrrr Miles was trying to convince the governess that nothing happened ? I don't know. | |
| | 2 | 10/29/2011 4:11 PM | Left unsatisfied and confused... Okay, so even though we have finished the book, I still am quite confused by the ending and furthermore, what was really happening throughout this entire book. Were the ghosts actually real? Were the children possessed? Or was the governess just obsessive and crazy? Or was it Miles that was messed up the entire time? Or was it even a combination of all of these? And what really makes this film so horrifying, even if the ghosts were never real? What was it that Mr. Chisnell was talking about when he mentioned the critics that condemed this book? And I just can't seem to get pass the fact that this entire story is the governess's account, thus making the story skewed. Can anyone please provide me with some answers and explanations? please? | |
| | 4 | 10/29/2011 1:05 PM | Freud and Turn of the Screw When I started reading Turn of the Screw I thought that Miles and Flora were speaking with the ghosts of Mrs.jessel and Quint. If I were to support this theory, though im not still sure if I do, I believe incorporating Freud's theory of how we fall in love with our parents could be applied. Like I have said before, Freud's work can be true, just not as extreme. Like those who marry poeple just like their parents, with the same physical attributes. Like those people, Flora and Miles are attracted to Mrs. Jessel and Quint due to the lack of parent figures in their lives. Mabye they are just contacting them out of curiousity, or something more? | |
| | 2 | 10/29/2011 11:07 AM | Quint and Jessel So the end of this book brought few answers and multiple questions, and one of the more pressing questions (I think) is, what exactly was the relationship between Quint/Jessel and Flora/Miles. Throughout this novel, it is alluded to that Quint and Jessel have somehow irreparably damaged Flora/Miles. I am confused as to how? I am assuming they sexually abused the children, but really I can't find any huge textual evidence that this occurred, it is merely a feeling and a moderate psychoanalysis of the kids. I was just wondering wht everyone else thought. | |
| | 2 | 10/29/2011 11:03 AM | The Governess Crazy – Chapter XX
Reading the governess’ reaction at the lake really cemented the ides that she is crazy and that the ghosts aren’t real, just I figment of her imagination. This is a climactic point in the novel, since the governess for the first time, accuses Flora of seeing and knowing about the ghosts. Normally, it is behind her back with Mrs. Grose, but the governess puts it out in the open. The governess claims she sees the ghost of Miss Jessel, but both Flora and Mrs. Grose do not. To me, this is concrete proof that the governess is crazy; that there are no ghosts. While it could be argued that too see the ghosts, one must possess a certain degree of intelligence and maturity and that only the governess does and therefore can, I’m not buying it. Another theory I have is that the kids, more so Flora in this situation, are manipulating Mrs. Grose. Throughout the novel, Mrs. Grose has always defended the children when it comes to the possibility of them being possessed evil. Maybe Flora or Miles is telling her not to say anything about the ghosts to the governess. But that’s a stretch, suggesting that the children are conspiring with Mrs. Grose, and I don’t believe that either. Anybody else want to share their reaction to this scene and offer some new insight? | |
| | 6 | 10/29/2011 8:34 AM | Lack of Closure No, this thread isn't about the obscure ending of the story, the Governess, Miles' death, or the ghosts. My concern is the complete disregard for any sort of connection to the prologue. I feel like Henry James either completely forgot that his entire story is written down as a memoir of the governess that is being read by a vague "Douglas" character, or he simply did not care enough to connect the rest of the book with the beginning. Also, since the setup of the story only lasts a few pages, does it really serve any significant purpose other than to proclaim the fact that the story is told from the viewpoint of the governess? | |
| | 5 | 10/29/2011 6:11 AM | Soooo the Narrator is a Girl? Okay so while I was reading Turn of the Screw I did not realize the transition from the man speaking in the beginning to the governess' narration. I don't know, but James didn't do a very convincing job on her part. I thought that she was a man narrating especially with her description of the little girl. I also thought the diction wasn't very feminine as well. It's kind of hard to describe but I feel like the sentence structure and the specific word choice really just does not sway me towards the notion that a woman is narrating.
Does anyone else feel this way? Disagree? Have better examples? | |
| | 6 | 10/28/2011 10:55 PM | I HATE THE ENDING Seriously?
Seriously........?
After all that, just when we seemed to be learning what really happened, why Miles really got expelled from school, if he has associations with the "ghosts", he just DIES?! His heart stops? The ending, perhaps, is just as vague as the entire story put together. It left me with more questions than answers. I guess this was the intent of the author, and it really adds to the psychological horror of the story, but I find it really irritating. I am the type of person who wants answers, and I didn't get really any answers throughout the whole story! Everything was so vague! Why did Miles get expelled? Why is the master so separated from everyone? Are the ghosts real or only in the governess's head? Does the governess even have a real name -_-? Oh well. Guess I'll never know. | |
| | 3 | 10/28/2011 7:59 PM | My Slightly Different Interpretation So, this may sound a little strange depending on how I explain it, but let's try. I don't think the kids are acting all that strange! I mean, sure, they're weird kids, but who hasn't met a kid with weird habits, who's maybe a little off? And these kids have every right to be a little strange! Both of their parents died, they were transported to a strange new country to live with their uncle who isn't very secretive about the fact that he doesn't even want these kids, so they're given to a governess who leaves and DIES, and then given to ANOTHER governess who basically only cares about them accepting her as an equal and not actually giving them any sort of structure or guidance or understanding. They had to live with this strange Quint character for a while, who was basically Miles' only role male role model, and an obviously not very intelligent housekeeper. Why wouldn't they be a little messed up?! They have no real healthy relationships nor anyone to trust! Just a crazy governess trying to trick them into admitting something they don't even understand. | |
| | 6 | 10/28/2011 4:17 PM | The Governess's Blunt Infatuation I must say I find it odd how quickly the governess fawns over Flora and Miles. Before even meeting them she is anxious and anticipating the most wonderful children. When she meets each child she describes them with complete adoration, and sees them as the purest of beings. I wonder if this over-infatuation with children at such a fast pace reflects the governess's desire to provide motherly love and care for a human being. | |
| | 0 | 10/27/2011 8:59 PM | Erikson and Flora Considering Erikson's Eight Stages of Development, and whether or not Flora's turnout was more fortunate than her brother's, Flora is going to be so messed up for the rest of her life! First of all, she hardly knows any kids her own age, other than her brother, so she's going to have a hard time communicating and interacting with people. Second of all, almost all of the authority figures in her life have died, something that she has a lot of experience with, but not necessarily a lot of knowledge of what exactly is going on! So, she's not going to be able to trust people or get close to them because she'll be worried about how long they'll be around! Not to mention that her uncle pretty much abandoned her and Miles and left them in the control of a houseful of people they don't know! Third of all, there's the governess who causes all sorts of crazy! She fawns all over her, which would cause confusion and an off sense of identity. And, the governess is freaking out about ghosts that supposedly no one else can see or has seen, basically finally driving Flora to hysterics! She also didn't try to build any sort of healthy relationship with either child, so Flora, being the only one still alive, already doesn't know how to form a proper relationship with other people! Even if all of these happened during the "school age" where she's supposed to be learning how to interact amongst her peers, her life is a combination of ruining the healthy construction of several of these stages at pretty much the same time. She won't know how to be dependent on others, will have strange confidence issues, and won't know how to interact properly with other people or form intimate relationships with them! She's looking at a whole lot of problems ahead of her in life and it's really unfortunate for a girl who's only six years old! | |
| | 7 | 10/27/2011 5:00 PM | Point of View The novel is written from the Governesses point of view, which can sometimes be decieving. Are her recollections or accounts of what happens with the children and the apparitions in the house true, or highly overexaggerated? Not much is said about the history of the Governess, so it is extremely hard to tell if she is an overdramatic person. What if all of the "strange" behaviors of the children are just them being sweet and innocent? Are the apparitions the Governess is seeing just a bad case of schizophrenia? If the novel incorporated different points of view from different characters, I feel like we could get a better look at what really goes on around the house. | |
| | 3 | 10/25/2011 7:36 PM | Questions/Clarifications
There were a couple things that confused me in the novel. First off all, I thought the governess, Mrs. Grose, and the two children (and I guess the ghosts if you count them) were the only things residing at the mansion. I was proved wrong in that there are other servants and maids tending to the home. At the end of Chapter XVIII, the governess says she left the letter to the master for Luke to take. I presume Luke is a servant that works for the master. Also, in the beginning of Chapter XXII, the governess references maids as to how she learned that Miles had breakfast with Flora. Another topic that confused me is the lake. When I read lake, I assumed a large mass of water, but I think lake is this sense is more of a pond. After all, in Chapter XIX, the governess says, “the lake, is at was called at Bly.” This suggests it is not really a lake. She calls it a pond, seemingly interchangeably, and can see across the other side. Was anybody else confused by the use of the word “lake” or the presence of any other servants in the house? | |
| | 4 | 10/23/2011 7:36 PM | Ambiguous Ending | |
| | 4 | 10/23/2011 5:34 PM | Calling the Children Out On Lies Everyone keeps bringing up the fact that the Governess should call these children out on their lies. Should she just confront them about it? I disagree. The children and ghosts seem to ovbiously be working as a team together. Four against one will not en well. The children and the ghosts could team up and possess the governess, they could physically and mentally hurt her. Being a horror novel these things are not unlikely. Not only could they hurt the governess, but the governess could hurt the children. What if the ghosts continue to haunt the children, to the point where they have a mental breakdown. It is ovbious that Miss Jessel and Quint were not good people so I'm sure that they are not innocent ghosts either. | |
| | 4 | 10/23/2011 5:10 PM | The governess' attitude towards the children At first, the governess was practically in love with the children and how beautiful and perfect they are. Then, later on in the story she starts to speak differently about the children. On page 57, when she wants get away from the house, she starts to think of how the children would react and says that they would, of course, play innocent with their questions to her. She seems to be getting frustrated with this game that the children are playing with her because she just cannot win. Her attitude towards the children is going from them being perfect, to them being even hideous, or "almost ugly" as she says about Flora on page 71. The children are being very difficult to work with and this could be causing the governess to start to dislike them. | |
| | 3 | 10/23/2011 5:06 PM | Governess vs. The Kids In this story, especially from around the middle of the story and on, it seems like there is a struggle going on between the governess and the kids. The governess thinks that there is something wrong and she wants to help but the children are not opening up to her. The kids are not cooperating at all with her. Every time she thinks she has them on the spot, they say something clever and get out of telling her anything. They keep many things secret from her and when their is a ghost, the children say that they see nothing, while the governess thinks that the children are lying because they can actually see the ghosts. It may be possible that the kids cannot see ghosts but they are definately playing games with her head and making her very skeptical about what goes on. The governess is just really having a hard time trying to prove that there are actually ghosts and the children are not helping at all, which can make things very frustrating for her. With the children's cooperation, she could probably crack this case, but other than that she is pretty much just a crazy women who sees things. | |
| | 13 | 10/23/2011 5:04 PM | Is the Governess crazy? Is the governess crazy or are all of the ghost sightings actually real? If they are real, it seems as though the children woud know that they are there, and even be in contact with the ghosts, yet they deny it. She could just be making up all these situations in her head, even subconsciously, based on events that may or may not have happened early on. What do you think? | |
| | 7 | 10/23/2011 3:34 PM | Plans of Quint I'm interested in some ideas brought forth from some conversation from class the other day. I firmly believe that Miles is possessed by Quint. I draw these conclusions from two situations discussed in class. The courtyard scenario was suspicious from the first read through and then the scene where Miles speaks to the governess in the bedroom. If I'm right and Miles is possessed I think that Quint is toying with the governess. Where will this lead them? | |
| | 4 | 10/23/2011 3:25 PM | Quint Murdered? It seems as though Quint could possibly be murdered? If I am nto mistaken, they discuss his death and how he slipped on ice walking, but when reading this i sensed some sarcasm. I thought that maybe someone had murdered him, someone who wanted revenge. Maybe is was Miss Jessel because he possible could have raped her, maybe it was Miles and Flora becaue he possibly could have molested them, or maybe it was just as accident. | |
| | 0 | 10/23/2011 1:26 PM | Miles’ Expulsion
In Chapter XXIV, we gain more insight into Miles’ cause for expulsion. When asked by the governess if he stole things at school, he said no. He did admit he said thing to the people he liked, and this is likely the reason. I infer that Peter Quint was a bad influence on Miles, and told him things a ten-year-old shouldn’t know. Being young and naïve, he repeated these bad things to his friends at school, and they told their friends and so forth until the headmaster got word of it and expelled Miles. This also explains how Flora was calling the governess mean things, probably things she heard from Miles/Peter Quint. I find it interesting that his reason for expulsion, or at least the reason I am sticking with, it much more innocent than the reasons I was coming up with, including sexually touching other children at school. I guess if we do not know exactly what or how something happened, we, as humans, tend to think of the worst possibility. This also parallels with how the governess is acting. She does not know why the children are acting the way they are, so she assumes ghosts. | |
| | 5 | 10/23/2011 11:36 AM | Never ending sentences As we have started to get into this novel, I have found that the hardest part for me is trying to plow through the descriptive sections which have 4 line sentences. Every time I turn the page and see that there is no dialogue, I get a little bit sad. Comprehension of the plot is not the the problem. I just find it to be so easy to get lost in the commas while I should be paying attention to the actual plot of the story. I'm wondering if these long periodic sentences are only included because of the writing style which was more popular in Victorian literature, or if they actually can tell us more about the narrator. Any thoughts? | |
| | 5 | 10/23/2011 11:20 AM | Dark Mary Poppins? I'm not sure if this is an odd connection to make to the novel, but I can't help thinking that this book is like a darker version of the Mary Poppins story. The Governess, who is Mary Poppins in this connection, begins to take care of two younger children who are somewhat mischievous and it seems they have something they are hiding. The Governess has to figure out what is going on with them and what is going on in the house when things begin to get strange. Mary Poppins has to discipline the kids because their parents haven't, and this becomes a bit of a difficult task. Both Mary Poppins and the Governess are put up to the challenge of taking care of these kids, but The Governess also has to figure out the eerie things she has been seeing in the house. | |
| | 4 | 10/23/2011 10:38 AM | Confusion! I have been very confused about this point for a long time. While I understand that Miss Jessel is dead, oviously because she is in ghost form, I am confused on how they know she died. Maybe I missed a key part when they discussed it but can anyone help me out? I was under the impression that she left and was fired meaning that they did not keep in touch, seeing the Mrs. Grose didn't even seem to be that good of friends with her. But where does it say that she died and if so, how? | |
| | 5 | 10/23/2011 10:25 AM | Warming up to the children I get a sense that these children have really grew onto the governess. I feel that she really wants to become closer with them. On page 26 she says "too free with MY boy?" when she is talking about Miles and Quint. Which shows that she is really building a relationship with them. | |
| | 11 | 10/23/2011 8:46 AM | "He liked them young and pretty" We contemplated who Mrs. Grose was talking about when she mentions to the governess that "he liked them young and pretty." We tried to figure out who the he was. At first we through out the idea that it could be the little boy, but after discussing it more I began to realize that the boy wouldn't make sense beacuse Mrs. Grose seems so fond of him. She explains to the governess how he looks so innocent and could never do anything wrong. Someone else then brought up that the sentance was in past tense: "him," and "liked." | |
| | 3 | 10/23/2011 1:02 AM | The Governess Illogical
I can’t seem to get over how illogical the governess acts. First of all, after hearing that Miles was expelled from school, she doesn’t try to obtain facts or try calling the school, she instead thinks of the darkest possibilities. I also find it strange that she assumes her pupils are lying to her and concealing information. Maybe she thinks there has to be something wrong with them, since she describes their appearance and behavior with each other as immaculate. Why she assumes the thing she saw is Miss Jessel I’m not sure. Additionally, it is strange to me how she tries to keep such a close watch on the children, but never confronts them about her suspicion of them lying. Maybe she likes playing detective or she is in love with her master. Either way, something seems off with her. | |
| | 7 | 10/23/2011 12:15 AM | For the Love of God, Use Direct Communication For the Love of God, Use Direct Communication
This is starting to get absolutely unrealistic. Honestly, no one talks like this, or rather, doesn't talk like this. This whole book is based on speculation and withholding. The Governess and Mrs. Grose interrupt eachother and the Governess extrapolates and misinterprets all Mrs. Grose says to treat her ghost theory. And the kids. Really? She just lets them carry on talking to pretend ghosts and wandering around at night. For months. And doesn't talk to them at all about it. I think the Governess is enjoying this game. No one could act this ridiculously and not enjoy it. She isn't doing her job of protecting the children, nor is she acting like a rational human being and figuring this thing out by actually speaking to the kids. And she is so controlling. SHE IS TAKING THE KIDS' LETTERS TO THEIR UNCLE BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO PRECIOUS TO SEND. That's so creepy. She is keeping the children for herself and by eliminating the uncle, she is keeping the authority in the house for herself. This clearly not okay. All the issues would be solved if she just talked to the uncle, let the children talk to him, and talked to the kids without all of this covertness and roundaboutness. | |
| | 7 | 10/22/2011 11:28 PM | The Children's Uncle To me, the uncle is pretty ridiculous for not wanting to have anything to do with the kids. It seems like he could possibly be a big help for the situation that the children and the governess are going through. First, Mrs. Grose told the governess to get the uncle to help and then on page 56, Miles also mentions that he wants his uncle to come down so that he can help Miles. So it seems like the uncle is somehow the key to solving the problem at hand. It does not make sense, though, how the uncle could be of any help because he does not really care, which means that he probably would not know enough about the kids to help them with the problems that they are going through. | |
| | 10 | 10/22/2011 11:14 PM | The Governess: Sane or not? So, I have taken it upon myself to start a probably never-ending debate as to whether or not the Governess is indeed seeing these apparations. I myself am not fully convinced one way or the other as I am sure there will be much more to come in the story that will sway my opinion one way or the other. All I want to do right now is discuss what events lead me to believe that she is insane, and the events that make me think that she really is seeing ghosts.
So firstly, on the "insanity" side of this argument we have a few major points. 1. She is living basically alone in a strange house for the rest of her forseeable future. She has nobody with whom she can confide in, and her future looks rather bleak. Her seeing ghosts may be a direct result of this situation. 2. Her writing about how perfect and angelic the children are and how she worships them leads me to believe that she is already a little less than sane from the beginning.
On the other hand, The Governess's descriptions of the ghosts are so vivid that it's almost impossible to assume that she is imagining them. Also, the governess did not know Quince but somehow she managed to describe him to Mrs. Grose, even without having known him(sorry, the syntax in that last bit was honestly awful but I'm tired and I think you get my point)
There is also the last idea that she is purposely weaving a tale that is shrouded in bias. I'm still unsure either way, I'm just projecting my thoughts. | |
| | 1 | 10/22/2011 11:08 PM | The Flaw in the Plan I think that the governess cares more for the children's happiness than their well-being. She would rather keep them in the perfect sphere of childhood innocence than breach the subject of the ghosts or their past. It's time for another Harry Potter reference. Whip out your hardcover American copies of Order of the Phoenix and turn to page 838. Dumbledore: "I cared about you too much. I cared more for your happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan... In other words, I acted exactly as Voldemort expects we fools who love to act. Is there a defense? I defy anyone who has watched you as I have- and I have watched you more closely than you can have imagined- not to want to save you more pain than you had already suffered." This parallels the governess' attitude towards the children in that she wants to spare them the pain of reliving their past and having to face the horror of the ghosts. This will probably not pan out very well for the governess and will end up doing more harm than good because secrets and lack of direct communication always leads to unforseen circumstances and the occasional hijinx. Also, the title of this post is the Harry Potter title of Deathly Hallows. But it fits. Two references. Bonus points. | |
| | 3 | 10/22/2011 5:04 PM | The Children's plan On page 66 after the governess realizes that she does not know where Flora is, she instantly thinks that the children set her up so that Flora could escape. Miles got the governess' attention by taking her with him so that he could play the piano for her, while Flora was running off to meet with Mrs. Jessel. Now, this idea does make sense because she did mention that Miles had never been such a gentleman before and when she ended up finding Flora, Mrs. Jessel was also present. When she first brought up the idea, though, it was like, man, this is all that this lady thinks about and she will connect almost any occurence to it. But in the end, she may have been right after all because these children are acting pretty suspicious. | |
| | 9 | 10/22/2011 4:55 PM | Miles' Motivation In first hour today, we discussed the section where Miles is seen wandering the grounds at night and what the implications of that had on the plot. We talked about how Miles professed to wanting the governess to think him bad. This display of power draws into question who really is in control here, Miles or the governess. If Miles is really just feeding the governess what he wants her to hear(which is similar to how the governess treats Mrs. Grose come to think of it..), then what is his goal in conducting this charade?
I don't remember who exactly said this, but it was said that Miles could just be trying to reach out to his uncle, who pretty much denies the children's very existence, through manipulating the governess to write to him.
So, do you guys think that this "ghost story" is really about ghosts, or about a ten year old's cry for attention? | |
| | 1 | 10/22/2011 2:51 PM | You can't get off like that Okay, on page 62 when Miles is explaining why he wants to leave Bly. When the Governess suggests that he go to his Uncle, Miles responds saying "You can't get off like that." I'm trying to understand what this means. Of course there's the sexual way of looking at it, saying you can't get off... Orrr he's using it like you can't be amused that way... Orr you can't benefit that way... Orrr you can't leave all of this that way. I'm not sure. There's so many different ways you can interpret it. What confused me further was the line in which James says "He made a movement on the pillow." I'm trying to use this detail to make Miles' meaning clearer but I just can't. Why is James so vague ?!?! It makes it so hard to understand. | |
| | 1 | 10/22/2011 2:03 PM | Page 68 quote On page 68 when the governess is looking for Flora with Mrs. Grose, the governess makes a comment that sounds a bit weird. When speaking of Flora she says, "She's not alone, and at such times she's not a child: she's an old, old woman." It makes sense when she says that sometimes Flora is not a child because there is definately a sense that these children know more than they should. They act like adults at times with the things they say and the games they play on the governess. But what is a bit odd to me is that she calls her an old, old women. That, to me, sounds like she is calling her a 90 year old women, but now that I think of it, she may just be putting way too much extra emphasis on the fact that Flora acts like an older women(an adult). | |
| | 2 | 10/22/2011 12:52 PM | The Others So far this book is reminding me of the movie The Others with Nicole Kidman. There are two kids, a giant house, people who work in the house. In the movie ghostly incidents start happening and such. Anyways, in the end of the movie it turns out that the people being haunted are actually the ghosts, and the ghostly occurrences are caused by living people who are making changes to the house. The children know that they are ghosts but they let the mother think otherwise because she needs to face the reality of the horrific deed she committed whilst she was alive. So I wonder if that's what's going on in this book. Because the ghosts don't do very much, they just sit and watch, I kind of think it might be the case. Also the scene when the Governess comes home from church and sees Miss Jessel in the schoolroom, it seems like the ghost hears her, but doesn't respond. So perhaps it is actually the Governess who is the ghost... | |
| | 3 | 10/22/2011 10:30 AM | Blame On page 63 when Miles and the governess are talking about his expulsion from school, Miles starts to get a little mad at the governess and blames her for his problems. He wants her to fix everything with the uncle like she did something terribly wrong that messed up everything. Miles has not even said anything about his expulsion, so there is no way that the governess would have been able to tell the uncle anything. He is saying that the governess pretty much ignored all the issues that occured, when really he is the one ignoring issues by not opening up about his expulsion and by not talking about why he acts the way he does. | |
| | 2 | 10/21/2011 4:04 PM | Suppression of truth/Projection of thoughts/Psychological concepts So, as Mr. Chisnell mentioned early on when reading this book, the time period it was written in was known for saying what was going on without saying what was going on, saying things that were true but not the full truth, and not explicitly saying anything that might make us feel uncomfortable. While the new critic may say that there is evidence in the text for the sexual material in the novel that is implied exists, someone else might say that these events are only projections of our (the readers) unconscious thoughts. So which is it? I think what is supposed to make this story scary is that we never truly know what is going on, and we give ourselves scary ideas of what is happening, much like the Governess gives herself ideas about situations in the story. | |
| | 1 | 10/21/2011 3:57 PM | Narrative The way this story is pieced together in a sort of reflective journalistic narrative is pretty intriguing. When I first read page 27 in particular I was a bit chafed by the governess's open egotism, but I can't determine whether it really was egotism, or just a bit of sarcasm. I feel like it could be argued both ways. On one side, she is supposedly young and naive, and with naivety could come an inflated sense of self worth(not to put her down or anything, but when you think about it it makes sense that the less you know of the world, the larger you see yourself in proportion to it...does the king of Pointland ring any bells?). On the other side, you could take into account the fact that she is looking back on the time when she was naive with a greater perspective like Chiz talked about late last week.
So, is the governess naive and conceited or wise from her experience and sarcastic? | |
| | 1 | 10/21/2011 3:29 PM | Is the Governess...CRAZY?! So, I think we all basically assume that the Governess is a little bit cuckoo, but I am wondering, to what extent. I personally am bothered by many of the events in this story because I can't shake the feeling that they are not even real. The way that the Governess keeps doubting herself makes me doubt her, and the fact that she has been trapped in a big creepy house for the past few months, and for the rest of her foreseeable life, with no one but an illiterate housemaid and two children to keep her company, makes me think that she is creating a lot of these events. Now, I am not saying that she is making everything up. It is perfectly plausible that she thinks she is seeing ghosts, and that the children are a little bit on the confusing side, but the more vague problems, such as the sexual undertones between Miles and the Governess is something that I think is a product of the Governess's overactive imagination and loneliness.
Thoughts? | |
| | 6 | 10/20/2011 3:35 PM | Is Flora crazy? In 6th hour we discussed the possibily of Flora being crazy and just seeing things. I think that she actually did see some ghost. Even though there is really no way to know if she was or wasn't, I think the fun in a ghost story is believing the story. It makes it more interesting and suspencful, but on the other hand questioning her sanity is kind of scary in it self, so either way I think this will turn out to be a good story. | |
| | 7 | 10/17/2011 6:40 PM | Mr. Chiz is a genius So I think that Chisnell purposely psyched us up about this book by saying its supposedly "the scariest book ever"(not a direct quote) and now we are all plowing through it to get to the horrifying part. I know that if I hadn't come into this book knowing that it's considered to be a horror novel, I would probably have stopped reading by now. Honestly, this book is written so densely that you really have to pay attention to catch any mildly horrifying details, and I sincerely hope that it gets easier. All I know is that now thanks to Chiz and all of his genius reverse psychology tricks, I am chomping at the bit to finish this book. | |
| | 10 | 10/16/2011 8:47 PM | Cliche? So I've started reading this novel, and the first chapter is the atypical scene of individuals sitting around together, trying to best the others in his or her's own scary story. It's sort of a very classic beginning, if you ask me. I've read up to Chapter 3 and I get the vibe that this book may also have some generic scary story characters. (Hint, weird children- boy who's evil in school and sent home, etc.) I just want to see everyone else's first impression, because I know Mr. Chisnell has really talked up this book, and granted we're not remotely far into it yet, but I do see some very familiar set ups already being put in place. | |
| | 12 | 10/16/2011 4:30 PM | Mrs. G and the governess First off, and I may have missed this in the sea that is victorian syntax...but does the governess have a name? None comes to mind...anyway, something I found interesting in first hour's discussion the other day was about the relationship between the governess and Mrs. Grose. Girlish hugging and kisses aside, they both seem to have high expectations of one another's friendship. The way they finish each other's sentences and assume to know what the other one means must mean that have a great trust in the fact that they are connected by some mysterious telepathy...or that Henry James wanted to create as much chance for misunderstanding as possible. From a new critic's standpoint, I'd say that their tangled messes of dialogue are a key vehicle to the rising tension in the story.
The dynamic of the governess and Mrs G's relationship based solely on the fact that they are the only inhabitants, besides two children, of a large house is also worth notice I thought. The Shining anyone?
| |
| | 1 | 10/16/2011 1:09 PM | Disturbing parts of the novel I was discussing in another post how their is a difference between scary and disturbing. But I felt that a new post should be mae about the disturbing aspects of this novel. Yes, the novel is ultimatley about ghost which, to a baisc reader, may seem like the scary part, but I can argue that that is not why I get the creepy feeling when I read this novel. It's not just the strange man lurking about or the innocent looking children, but the way the book is written in definently the most disturbing of all. It is written as a memory, with the governess (who is nameless), as the narrorator. We discussed not only how this book is written, but why. Why would the governess write this account of what happened at that house, and who was she meaning to write this to? While our questioned remained unanswered, it does make me think about how she words certain lines. Like why does she describe the boy the way she does, and when she discusses what she is to do about the boys trouble in school, she comments "I answered wonderfully." | |
| | 5 | 10/16/2011 12:26 PM | Horror Novels Mr. Chisnell was saying that a majority of the reviews or criticisms of The Turn of the Screw said that it was just another horror novel. Nothing over the top or especially scary about it, just another scary book like ones by Steven King. Mr. Chisnell said that he did happen to find one review on it that stated it was the most horrifying novel ever written, and he agreed. My question is, why do some people look at it as just another horror novel, and others look at it as the scariest book ever written? From a New Critic standpoint, who is correct? And is one or more of the reviews bringing certain emotions into their criticisms? | |
| | 7 | 10/16/2011 12:14 PM | No Gentleman is He Brought up in first hour was the remarkable memory of our governess. Seeing Mr. Quint very briefly she's able to remember and extrapolate even on almost too many of his features. (This is mainly on page 23). She takes her extrapolation past his features though; the governess is able to conclude that Mr. Quint is no gentleman. The reason that this conclusion bothers me is because she describes him so well and even goes on to say that he has the appearance of an actor, but that he is no gentleman. I feel that this lady contradicts herself. | |
| | 7 | 10/16/2011 12:10 PM | Quint On page 26, Mrs. Grose and the governess are talking about Quint. Mrs. Grose mentions that "Quint was much too free...too free with everyone." The governess' reaction to this is disgust because she is imagining Quint being too free with Miles. It seems like the man had to much freedom, which gave him power to do whatever he wanted. With this information, Quint may have been looking for Miles after all. To go even further, if being to free with Miles means what the goveness thinks it means, then this may be the reason why Miles has this hidden badness that got him kicked out of school. This part of the book is very interesting and can help to explain more why some things are happening the way that they are. | |
| | 1 | 10/16/2011 11:52 AM | Did Flora see something? On page 41, after the governess had seen a ghost, she realizes that Flora was not in her bed. Then she finds Flora hiding by the window and asks her if she saw anything. Flora's response to this question was, "Ah, no!" The way that she said no, made me think that she had to be lying because she said no in a very suspicious way. The goveness also caught on and recognized that Flora was lying about this. I really do think that she saw something but does not want to say anything about it. These perfect little kids are hiding something and are acting very strange. I am going to be very interested in learning what these kids actually know and what kind of people they actually are. | |
| | 4 | 10/16/2011 11:51 AM | Attention to detail... Are the ghosts real or just something of her imagination? Something that really sparks the idea that these apparitions could be fake is her attention to detail as we dive further into the story. When the governess "sees" Miss Jessel, the description of her is clearly not as detailed as that of Quint. And when she brings this up to Mrs. Grose, SHE is actually the one to claim it was Miss Jessel, when she doesn't really know anything about her to be able to claim such a thing. It just makes me wonder whether these apparitions are real, or all in her mind. | |
| | 4 | 10/16/2011 11:32 AM | The Governess conceitedness I have noticed that after the Governess begins seeing the ghost she becomes incredibly full of herself. On page 27, the Governess says "... I was in these days literally able to find a joy in the extraordinary flight of heroism the occasion demanded of me." I think it's rather strange that she thought of herself as so heroic just because... what ? Because she didn't abandon the house at the sight of a ghost ? I'm not sure. I know she is thinking that it's her duty to protect the children but, I don't think the situation had shown a need for protecting yet. | |
| | 4 | 10/16/2011 10:46 AM | Are There Actually Ghosts? Does anyone else think that maybe this is all a complete farce? What proof do we have that these ghosts are really ghosts? They are not seen by anyone who saw them during their supposed lives, the Governess just fits them to descriptions that Mrs. Grose gives her and has a lot of "Eureka!" moments regarding their identity and intentions. There is, however, no proof of this. She and Mrs. Grose talk of it in a roundabout way, and she doesn't talk with the children of it at all directly. So what are we to believe? She might be imagining the whole scenario. Someone really just needs to sit all of them down and have them hash it out, because this cryptic nonsense isn't flying with me. | |
| | 1 | 10/16/2011 10:36 AM | Miles' Excuse When the governess wakes up in the night and spots Miles outside on the front lawn, both her reaction and Miles' explanation seem a little strange. This scene brought up more questions than answers. What was Miles really doing outside? Why did the governess demand a reason for his absence from him, feeling a sense of triumph, as if at last she had "got" him, and then accept the answer he gave when it was probably a lie? Why did she then hug him, as if she didn't have any suspicions? Her actions don't align with her thoughts on the matter, obviously. But why can't she tell Miles that she knows he's lying, and she knows about the ghosts?
I'm guessing that the reason Miles was outside had to do with some sort of communication with the ghosts. However, I don't understand why he had to go outside in order to acheive it. I also don't know whether Flora is as involved in the supernatural occurences as her brother.
Any thoughts?
| |
| | 1 | 10/16/2011 10:34 AM | The Governess' credibility A few times in the book, the governess mentions that something she says may not sound believable, but that it is still the truth. She probably does this to make her sound less crazy because she at least acknowledges that what she is saying does not sound right. For example, on page 27 she says, "I scarce know how to put my story into words that shall be a credible picture of my state of mind" and on page 47 she says, "I go on, I know, as if I were crazy; and it's a wonder I'm not." It seems like she is really trying to say that she is not crazy and that everything she is saying is true not matter how unbelievable it sounds. The theory that we came up with in 6th hour that maybe she wrote this to defend herself and her sanity may be the actual reason for writing it after all. | |
| | 6 | 10/16/2011 1:50 AM | "another turn of the screw" That quote - "another turn of the screw" from the first page of the preface lept out at me immediately, due to the obvious connection to the book's title. So we must ask - what is the screw?
I think its fairly clear that the screw is connected to feelings of fear or even terror. But what is it? Some implement of fear driven into our hearts? Our minds? I get the impression that this refrain of the "turning of the screw" will have some import for this work. What did this immediate connection to the title make you think? | |
| | 2 | 10/15/2011 11:37 PM | Messed up Society On pages 10-11, there is talk about how a student was sent home from school and may never be allowed back because he was considered "an injury to the others." This idea, to me, is a bit outrageous, considering his age. The child is only ten years old or so; the school needs to give him a chance. The kid still has a lot of time to change his attitude, behavior, and goals in life. A bad ten year old kid could turn into a well educated, hard-working, successful adult as long as he is given a chance and the time is put in by his elders to help change the way that he is. This society is like a dictatorship run by Hitler, where if you are not a good enough student then you are garbage, except that it may be too much to say that this society resembles anything close to what Hitler did. I believe that there should be no child left behind and that everybody should get a chance, but if the child grows into an adult and becomes an "injury to society" then that person should be left behind because they should know better as an adult. | |
| | 4 | 10/15/2011 11:29 PM | No Worries in the World Near the top of page 19 the governess describes Miles as a boy who acted as if he had no history, as if nothing had ever happened to him in his life. It seemed like he started fresh each day and that he "never for a second suffered." To some extent, I think that it is great to start each day as a fresh start and try to forget about worries or troubles so that one could continue on living and enjoying life. But, going along with this, one must not forget his/her past and continue each day acting like nothing ever happened when something very significant has happened. Miles does act this way. He acts as if he has no worries in the world, even though he has just been kicked out of school forever for doing something that must have been terrible. There is definately something wrong with this child, psychologically, that makes him able to really just not care about things and it is kind of haunting in a way that will send chills down your spine. | |
| | 4 | 10/15/2011 1:33 PM | A devil and an angel So far I really like this book. I have picked up strange thoughts and comparisons, one between Flora and Miles. I picture them as really cute kids. From how the governess describes Flora, she is the most charming, remarkable, and beautiful little girl she has ever laid her eyes on. I remember reading she asked if Flora's brother, Miles, would be "as remarkable as her." To cut to the chase, Flora represents an angel, and Miles represents a devil's spawn. Being raised Catholic the Devil is as bad as anything can get. I'm already freaked about about this. Miles represents a demon figure by he got expelled from school, and the school wont say why. Also, he just seems like a little brat! In the beginning of chapter two when Mrs. Grose and the governess are talking about the letter from the school about Miles they way they describe him is eerie. "He may never go back" and "they absolutely decline him." Any thoughts, or am I just paranoid? | |
| | 0 | 10/15/2011 11:54 AM | Top of page 20 At the top of page 20 there is another moment where the governess encounters the ghost again. What I found so interesting about this was that he was only there a few seconds, yet she was able to gather so much information from the incident. These few seconds convinced her that he saw and recognized her, that he looked all around the room, and that he had come there for someone else. To me these conclusions are hard to make in only a few seconds. She may be making inferences about too many things without being sure. She also says that it was like she "had been looking at him for years and known him always." In her brain, she is freezing the situation and trying to picture everything exactly when really she may have forgotten some of the specifics, but is still add things in that she may want to believe. It seems like maybe she is tricking herself into believing some things that may not even have happened and this is making her story a posible imagination that never really happened. | |
| | 0 | 10/15/2011 11:36 AM | Intimacy I'm rather sure that everyone has seen the attraction that has developed between the governess and the little boy, Miles. I'm not sure I'll be putting out a 100% original thought, but on the bottom of page 18 there was something that I wanted to comment on. The governess writes about Miles in such terms of adoration, "the real rose, flush of his innocence" and how he is "too fine and fair". These few comments and some other thoughts brought up in class have me wondering about the true feelings that the governess has towards little Miles. I believe she says "her" Miles. | |
| | 0 | 10/15/2011 11:29 AM | Foreshadowing So I remember Chiz saying that one of the other classes discussed foreshadowing. I had at least one area of the book that struck me as foreshadowing. When the governess was walking and she was thinking to herself how she really wanted to encounter somebody, and she did. This struck me as very unusual. Having never had thoughts like that I thought this must have been significant. Because someone appeared, and that someone almost seemed like a something, I suspected a ghost. It made me wonder if the possible apparition could read minds. Despite how silly it sounds, it is what went through my mind. | |
| | 0 | 10/15/2011 11:28 AM | The Children Near the bottom of page 18, the governess starts to talk about how wonderful the children are. She talks about how she did not just have to get used to them and basically deal with them or accept them for who they are even though she did not like it. She loved the children and was able to learn something new about them constantly that allowed her to like them more and more the longer they knew eachother. But the one thing she did not learn more about was the way Miles acted at school. This knowledge is a long, deep, and obscure road that is very frightening. There is something odd about these children especially Miles and this unsureness of the governess is just a hint that tells us that there is something deeper going on with the children than what the governess sees. I, for one, am going to be very interested in seeing the children in their true light. | |
| | 0 | 10/15/2011 11:02 AM | Word choice On the top of page 17 there is an occurrence where the governess sees a man and describes him in an odd way. The diction used in this particular paragraph seemed, to me, very suggestive of something more. By using words like erect, struck, hard, and sharpest, it seemed to me that there were definately some sexual connotations to this description. When I first read this, my reaction was, no, this is so wrong, what is this lady's problem? She was really going overboard on this description of this guy that she apparently did not know. Maybe I am the weird one, but to me this paragraph seemed strange and sexually connotative. | |
| | 3 | 10/12/2011 10:58 PM | The Governess' POV and other rambles... "Turn of the Screw" is narrated by the lovely Governess that after reading the first few chapters we can conclude she might be a little crazy (if at first we didn't know this was a horror story, I'll get to that later)... My thoughts on this so far is that it doesn't seem like your typical scary story. Which isn't always a bad thing... but as of right now I am just trying to figure out where Henry James is trying to go with this. The fact that it is in the Governess' point of view really affected me. It def gives the reader a more personal connection with the story unlike how it would be if it was an outside source (perhaps Douglas) looking down. But as always I must consider the New Critic and wonder what he must say about this story.
The intention of any scary story is to provoke your emotions and set you on the edge of your seat, but in being able for this to happen you must let that emotion show and carry throughout the text, or else we would find ourselves monotone-ly (yeah, that's def not a word...) reading this text makeing it as boring as can be. So in order to connect to the kind of genre a book is supposed to be make it critical for our emotions and feeling we get from the text to come out? Therefore, if we were told to read this story and had no idea that it was considered horror... would we know? Or would we just think that this book could be about a lady who needs to be checked into an insane asylum, or about killer vegetables?! | |
| | 2 | 10/12/2011 10:50 PM | My Own Horror Story I spent but two seconds in class describing what it might be like to encounter a full-bodied apparition in real life, as opposed to the governess' documented reaction. I'm not sure if I mean to clarify anything, or want to create a thread for those (who are willing) to share their own experiences, as mine is helping me understand the governess' motives and articulation in her manuscript.
So here goes: two summers ago, being the local history buff that I am, I ventured down to Historic Fort Wayne, in Detroit. The fort was constructed in 1840 to protect the port of Detroit after the site acted as a militia base during the war of 1812. As I strolled about the grounds, a volunteer approached the group I was with and asked if we "had any trouble" or "needed help". Not at all, just perusing the fort and grounds, we replied. For some reason, the fort historian continued to follow us around and guide us on an informal tour, inconspicuously straying from certain areas of the grounds and leading us away from certain buildings on the grounds. My first "encounter" happened as we walked through the sally port, or underground entrance to the fort from the outside. Even for a dark, musty tunnel, the sally port harbored a still and uncomfortable feeling, if not overwhelmingly foreboding. As we walked, the air became colder and colder still. Goosebumps were soon arising on my arms, and in an instant, I was paralyzed as a hyperborean gust of energy or wind, I'm still not sure, swept through me, front to back. "Did you guys feel that? Oh man! What was that?" I frantically called to my group around me. Nothing, they replied, we didn't feel anything. However, I began to get suspicious as the afternoon wore on, still thinking about my experience, and how it didn't settle with me all together. Sensing the tour was near a close, our "guide" led us over to an older looking building with a newer looking widow's walk porch, suspended just above the ground. Inside, we met another man, who appeared to be the same age as my dad, and his son, Ben, who appeared to be my age. As they showed us around the small ranch cottage, newly restored to it's original use by the fort as a detention area, they opened up to my suspicions, "this fort is reportedly haunted." With wide-eyed wonder, in the years before shows like Ghost Adventures dominated Friday night prime time television, I fired question after question upon Ben about the stories, and his own experience at the fort, and it's mysterious guests. While I won't digress into what he told me about his time, I will say that my group stayed longer than we anticipated. Ben and his father took us by locations on the grounds that the old guidesman wouldn't, like the parking lot covering the 1000CE old Native American burial mound, decimated in the 1940's, and the one partially preserved near the banks of the Detroit River that remains fenced off to preserve the sacred tradition of the Potowatami. "Could this disrespect for a deeply spiritual native people upset a social norm amongst the residents at the for?" I asked. Sure, and, of course, and, definitely, they replied. As we walked through the sally port once more (this time, sanity preserved) towards the four-story barracks complex, I was told one last tale, this time of death in the fort. Ben and his father told us that between 1840 and 1973, when the fort was "active", it saw no live militant action, as anticipated the the U.S. military, as anticipated, so the fort was used as a holding and training base for every American war from the Civil War to the Vietnam War. Single men, as well as whole families moved into houses on the premises, left to their toil, and the haunting thought of deployment. Hospital records, they said (and later showed us) left haunting descriptions of men being injured or killed during drills, men taking their own lives, and murders of soldiers by officers and vice versa. Ben and his father were more than happy to re-enact specific stories for us as well, which eventually proved to be far more than necessary after the fourth demonstration. When we arrived at the door to the barracks, they stopped us suddenly to offer some advice in somber tones, "a lot of misery happened in here, but so did a lot of joy. this building is still alive with that energy." All I anticipated seeing after that was maybe getting to lie in a Civil War-era cot and see the mess area. What I did see was a roped off third floor. "Why?" We don't let most guests go up there for safety and other reasons, Ben's father replied. Two minutes later, the second story bunk room ceiling began to cry out. Steel toed boots pounded above us as we stood, looking at each other, as if on ecstasy, suddenly infatuated with each other's gaping mouths and frightened eyes, white and open. The pacing above stopped. Probably just a draft, chuckled Ben's father. He quickly escorted us down the stairs, still lined with scratches from steel-toed boots. Ben tied the faded blue stanchion across the ground floor stairwell landing and his father showed us quickly into the WWI mess hall. I could see the beating heart of a girl in my group as we sat and looked around at the various weapons mounted on the wall. After five or six thumps, we suddenly were begging to leave. On our way out, Ben pointed at a red fox, a regular specimen inside the fort, leaping about the interior parade grounds. Of course, I wouldn't tell this story if I hadn't seen what Ben was really pointing at, behind the small vulpini mammal still digging holes. Still performing his guard duties, was "the sergeant", a supposed regular amongst Fort Wayne's ghosts. The wispy figure, who appeared as clear as color television was visible above his knees, which faded in to the ground. We stood in stunned silence to watch him walk four paces to his right, turn about face, and slowly dissipate into the door of the sally port.
I've since visited the fort only once. To have experienced all I did in one day, in broad daylight, I've come to understand is extremely rare, even "special". As I continue to read The Turn of the Screw, I keep my experience in my mind, new criticism aside, to study the governess and Miles from another perspective. I've been thinking of this since the novella was placed in my hands, and invite others to empathize my experiences and thoughts toward the ghastly encounters as we continue to discuss online and in class. | |
| | 0 | 10/9/2011 2:53 PM | The Start So the other day I decided I would take advantage of the fact it was nice outside. So I got into my car with The Turn of the Screw in my hand and drove to a park. It was the perfect setting to start the book and I can tell this is going to be a creepy novel but i'm intrigued. | |
| | 0 | 10/9/2011 1:50 PM | Interesting I have yet to read a part of the book but I am anxious to see how this thriller will turn out i think it is great to have novel that takes a break fro the usual "boring" to most an gives us something that we may acutally like, and also feeds our inner alligator. | |
| | 1 | 10/9/2011 1:48 PM | Love? After reading the prologue and the first chapter I was a bit confused on why the object of Love would come into a novel that we were told was so "horrifying". After thinking about it, it is absolutely necessary. Now, we don't meet the man that she "loves" quite yet (I havent read past chapter 1 yeat) but it seems that from the prolg. and Ch 1 that the hint of love from the governess who is narrating chapter 1, and the man employing her is quite obvious.
Once I started thinking, I almost expected the story to turn into a somewhat Gothic romance and along with that maybe a unrealistic plot like you see in so many ghost stories today. That maybe "the governess with fall in love with the rich gentleman and he will save her life and they'll be so happy and battling the demons with make their love stronger".... blahblahblah. But something along these lines is necessary to turn this book into a horrifying novel. Without some sense of love or at least a liking towards each other, it wouldn't capture our minds and make us truly scared. It would just be another book about some random people getting killed. But because of the connection between them (so far, or at least in her mind) it just puts a bigger grip on us. I love it. | |
| | 2 | 10/9/2011 11:09 AM | Creepy On page nine, there is a little girl giving a tour to the main character. During the tour he strts to look at her in a different way. He starts to call her his "little conductress" and how he started to have a "view of a castle romance inhabited by a rosy sprite, such a place as would somehow... take all color out of storybooks and fairytales." My first reaction was: wow, what a creeper. He is saying that he imagines a romance with a little girl that is so bad, that it would ruin children's fairytales. Life itself pretty much ruins fairytales anyway, but that is when a person becomes an adult and knows enough about life to know that these stories never could happen. But this guy is being really weird and twisting a storybook into a very, very wrong romance, not suited at all for children or even adults. | |
|
|
|
|
|
|