Victorians! discussion

Discuss this section of the reading. Spoilers for this section only.

I have to admit that this section is bogging down for me. I had this same experience with the Aspern Papers; a strong beginning, but a slow middle. Maybe this is just James, maybe I'm supposed to be paying more attention to gradual character development and nuance than I am, but for the time being I'm struggling. I wish the governess/narrator would stop talking so much about herself and her angst and get on with events.

Same, having a really hard time getting into this story. Which sucks because I normally love this sort of gothic ghost story and have been looking forward to reading this for ages.

I don't think all the commas are helping, so many of the sentences just feel awkward and I keep having to reread them which breaks the flow of the narration. Maybe that's just me being not in the right mood though.

Louise wrote: "...so many of the sentences just feel awkward and I keep having to reread them ..."

Welcome to reading Henry James -- at least that's my opinion. I understand why Queen Elizabeth said of his novels, "Come on, get on with it." (paraphrase)

But, somehow, after enjoying The Portrait of a Lady and struggling mightily with The Wings of the Dove , I'm of the mindset this wily writer is worth wrestling with. Maybe it is Henry himself, maybe it is his brother William (whose work I have not read to any depth), maybe it is the family story of New England wealth, religion, and Civil War participation, maybe it is the Euro-American intersection -- not sure quite what, but I am in a place in my own reading journey to invest a bit in the struggle because the d... insights are so devastatingly convoluted, like life itself.

I will add, one of the clues to reading James that I feel as if a friend helped me stumble upon: if it is not there, even though you think it should be, it's not what James wants you to notice or pay attention towards.

What I haven't decided yet is whether, if it is there, should one necessarily pay attention to it! (grin and grimace)

It's interesting that you are talking about this. I found that although a great story, the Turn of the Screw was a little more difficult to flow with than the Aspern Papers. And although TAP isn't as interesting (in my opinion) as TOTS, it is easier to go along with simply because there aren't as many run-on sentences.

What I find more challenging than run-on sentences are the sentence fragments that so many of the governess' and Mrs. Grose's conversations consist of.

Not a real quote, but something like this:

"Do you think it's possible...?"

"You don't mean..."

"I do!"

The governess, to me, appears to be jumping to a great many conclusions with no basis to them. That Quint wants Miles. That Flora saw Miss Jessel and was deliberately ignoring her so that the governess wouldn't realize that she saw her, etc. It may all be true, but what makes her think so?

She also seems to be reading a lot into Mrs. Grose's reactions. I'm not sure whether Mrs. Grose really agrees with her, or whether the governess is frightening her and so she is humoring her.

It seems that even the governess herself has considered whether she is imagining things, but, as she points out to Mrs. Grose, if she is making it up (and Mrs. Grose does not appear to have even suggested that she is making it up, so her saying this is suggestive), how is it that she was able to describe Quint so accurately?

I find with some Victorian authors, such as James, I'm benefitted greatly by reading outloud. I don't subvocalize when I'm reading, and long run on sentences get jumbled in my mind. For TOTS I listened on audiobook and read as well, which helped shape the sentences better (I had a reading disability when I was younger, so I've always had a great help by listening and reading along, though it can be tedious when you get excited and what to jump ahead of the narrator).

The stunted conversations between Grose and the Governess were always very odd to me. I think its partially the issue with the unreliable narrator. She is reading into Grose's actions; she is, in fact, filling the housekeeper's mouth with words.

Remember the instance when Grose said "Do you mind much..." and the Narrator replied with "take this instance to kiss me? Of course not"

What was Grose really going to say? Because I personally doubt that she was asking for the liberty to show affection to this woman who just waltzed into her house and took over everything. In fact, one of the articles I read talked about the often overlooked class struggle that was happening in TOTS. Grose basically had the run of the place until the master sent back some pretty, young, and semi-wellborn lady, who just comes in and takes over. Whats more is that the NN is possibly so self centered she barely even realizes she does it, instead referring to Grose as deferential to the NN's ways, that her logic over awes the poor woman who cant read, etc.

This was the part of the story that really started throwing up warning bells for me as to the Narrator's mental stability (and that was before I was aware that its an often argued point). As I pointed out in section one I find her obsession with the children's innocence disquieting. Her idea that she wants to attract the eye of the master by doing such an impeccable job lacks logic since she is allowed literally no contact with him. Not to mention the way she dwells on the way the "unknown man" stares at her, for day afterwards until she upsets herself. Its very odd to say the least... but then, how WOULD she know what Quint looked like? And it couldnt jsut be some person walking through because he literally disappeared as soon as she ran outside for him.

Lily wrote: "Welcome to reading Henry James -- at least that's my opinion. I understand why Queen Elizabeth said of his novels, "Come on, get on with it." (paraphrase) "

LOL!! Smart woman, that.

Denise wrote: "The governess, to me, appears to be jumping to a great many conclusions with no basis to them. That Quint wants Miles. That Flora saw Miss Jessel and was deliberately ignoring her so that the governess wouldn't realize that she saw her, etc. It may all be true, but what makes her think so?
"

Nicely said. My feeling exactly. I begin to wonder whether the governess is normal, or has some issues of her own that are starting to bubble to the surface.

The strength of her passion to protect the children is a bit unnerving; it doesn't seem healthy to me.

Or maybe I'm just being affected by the ghostly aura of the story and imagining things as much as she is.

Becky wrote: "Her logic that she wanted to attract the eye of the master by doing such an impeccable job lacks logic since she is allowed literally no contact with him."

Nice point. I hadn't picked up on that.

Keep coming up with these great insights that I, at least (and maybe others) am not noticing.

This is all very interesting to me, too. I hadn't been looking for inconsistencies in the characters, but blindly trusted that what the governess said she was experiencing, and how she interpreted others, was accurate. I'm beginning to think that she did have some problems that I hadn't noticed, and this puts a new spin on the story.

Everyman wrote: "Becky wrote: "Her logic that she wanted to attract the eye of the master by doing such an impeccable job lacks logic since she is allowed literally no contact with him."

Nice point. I hadn't pick..."

I think that it's possible that she is hoping that sooner or later he will come to the house to see how things are going, and will be completely impressed by what a good job she is doing. After all, he can hardly expect that this is going to continue with no contact for the rest of his life! He does have some responsibilities towards his wards.

It seems to me that the governess forms opinions of people almost instantaneously and becomes virtually obsessed about these opinions. She seems to be practically in love with the master, and, as others have noted, her feelings towards the children are rather creepy. She also found Mrs. Grose to be a good, homely (I'm using the old-fashioned meaning for that) woman, and thus an ally, and immediately was completely repulsed by the evil she sensed in Quint and Jessel. She goes overboard in her feelings towards everybody.

Note the reference in the sixth paragraph to our tale (at least, if I counted correctly or it didn't move):

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

Compliments of Zeke on the Classics Board, so if you think you saw this elsewhere.....

Denise wrote: "It seems to me that the governess forms opinions of people almost instantaneously and becomes virtually obsessed about these opinions. She seems to be practically in love with the master, and, as others have noted, her feelings towards the children are rather creepy. "

I haven't picked up at all on the love for the master, but I totally agree that she makes instantaneous judgments (why on earth should she automatically assume that Quint wants Miles?), and also on the creepiness of her feelings toward the children.

Everyman wrote: "I haven't picked up at all on the love for the master, but I totally agree that she makes instantaneous judgments (why on earth should she automatically assume that Quint wants Miles?), and also on the creepiness of her feelings toward the children."

What gave me the idea was that she fantasizes about him coming to the house and approving of what she has done. I don't want to transcribe it all, but reread the fantasy she is having when she is out walking in the grounds and first encounters the vision of Quint on the tower. The 'someone' she speaks about is, I believe, the master, and this seems like a romantic fantasy to me, more than just a simple wish for his approval. I seem to remember other times she has these ideas of him being impressed by her, as well.

Also, before her narration begins, Douglas does say, "Yes, she was in love. That is, she had been. That came out - she couldn't tell her story without its coming out. I saw it, and she saw I saw it: but neither of us spoke it." Perhaps he is reading something into it that isn't there, or perhaps there is another candidate for her love that we will see by the end of the story, but this could also be implying that she was bowled over by the master - "a gentleman, a bachelor in the prime of life, such a figure as had never risen, save in a dream or an old novel, before a fluttered, anxious girl out of a Hampshire vicarage."

Denise wrote: "Also, before her narration begins, Douglas does say, "Yes, she was in love. That is, she had been. That came out - she couldn't tell her story without its coming out. I saw it, and she saw I saw it: but neither of us spoke it.""

I had forgotten that. Hmmm. But with whom? Hmmmmm.

Is Douglas within the story? Perhaps with a different name? I have no idea at this point, but the way the opening frame reads leads me to pose the question.

Louise wrote: "Same, having a really hard time getting into this story. Which sucks because I normally love this sort of gothic ghost story and have been looking forward to reading this for ages.

I don't think a..."

Amen to that! So glad I'm in good company. If you notice my post in the previous Chapter segment, you'll see I'm experiencing the same thing. Every once it a while it will pick up the tempo for me, and then I find myself struggling again! So glad to know I'm not yet losing my mind!!

Denise wrote: "What I find more challenging than run-on sentences are the sentence fragments that so many of the governess' and Mrs. Grose's conversations consist of.

Not a real quote, but something like this:

..."

I think the governess is also making lots of assumptions. Just because she saw a lady, how does she know the child saw her and how did she know it was the previous governess????

Everyman wrote: "Denise wrote: "The governess, to me, appears to be jumping to a great many conclusions with no basis to them. That Quint wants Miles. That Flora saw Miss Jessel and was deliberately ignoring her so..."

And what exactly does she have to protect the children from?

A lot of the essays I read stated that Victorian readers would have accepted and immediately known that Quint and possible Miss Jessel were child molesters. When Ms. Grose says "he was much to free with them." In fact, all of the essays I read on this seemed to even take it for granted that Victorians would have recogized them as having been sexually free with the children - that fact was one of the only things the essayists dont seem to argue about.


Now Grose seems to react very poorly when she is asked to describe how Quint was. Even if we dont accept that he was a child molester, Grose does in fact make it seem as though he was dangerous around the house. He wore the masters clothes, took liberties with the staff, etc... and I believe it was mentioned elsewhere he had a violent temper.

As for Miss Jessel she allowed it to happen, and was in a relationship with Quint. I got the distinct impression that she died in childbirth... having such a stain on your character in Victorian times would have been terrible.


Now, whether you believe the NN is seeing ghosts are not, if she believes what she is seeing, or if they are real, she would probably worry about someone of that character coming back for the children.

One of the things I wonder about is the ages of the child. I'm reading the original printed version of the book so Miles is about 8 and Flora is very young. Apparently James later changed the ages so that they were older. Has anyone else come across this? I only wonder because I wonder if Miles was homosexual and possibly engaged in a relationship with Quint (they went off together for hours) or maybe Miss Jessell (who knows?) and his sexual knowledge couldve gotten him expelled from school.

Lily wrote: "Is Douglas within the story? Perhaps with a different name? I have no idea at this point, but the way the opening frame reads leads me to pose the question."

I don't think he is within the story. He said that he met her when she was working as governess to his sister and he came home from college.

Becky wrote: "A lot of the essays I read stated that Victorian readers would have accepted and immediately known that Quint and possible Miss Jessel were child molesters. When Ms. Grose says "he was much to free..."

That could be the case, or perhaps they were just too intimate with each other when the children were around. I also strongly got the impression that Jessel was pregnant when she left.

Interesting suggestion about why Miles was expelled!

Denise wrote: "I don't think he is within the story. He said that he met her when she was working as governess to his sister and he came home from college. ..."

So is Flora his sister and Miles his name in the story? Yes, I know I am being far-fetched, but I do understand the framing is left open ended.

Lily wrote: "Denise wrote: "I don't think he is within the story. He said that he met her when she was working as governess to his sister and he came home from college. ..."

So is Flora his sister and Miles hi..."

Probably not, since he was college age when he met her, and she told him the whole story at that time. I won't say more because it would be a major spoiler...

Lily wrote: "Is Douglas within the story? Perhaps with a different name? I have no idea at this point, but the way the opening frame reads leads me to pose the question."

Ask this question again in the final chapter topic. It's a great question, but it would be a spoiler to talk about it here.

Becky wrote: "I got the distinct impression that she died in childbirth... having such a stain on your character in Victorian times would have been terrible."

Wow. I didn't see that at all. But it would make sense. And if it was the case, who would be the most likely father? The Master? Quint? Somebody not in the story? (Or even, grasping at straws, Douglas??)

Becky wrote: "I only wonder because I wonder if Miles was homosexual and possibly engaged in a relationship with Quint ... and his sexual knowledge couldve gotten him expelled from school. "

Hmmm. My very limited knowledge of English boys boarding schools of the period (almost all boarding schools of the time were single sex) leads me to think that homosexuality among the boys wouldn't be all that unusual, certainly nothing to be expelled for.

I have trouble believing that an openly homosexual child in Victorian England would face no reprecussions at school, particularly if they were caught being immodest with another child. Other students might not have though much of it, but the teachers surely would have. Homosexuality aside, if he was discussing sexually explicit things in this time frame of utter repression, he may have been dismissed.

And I assumed from the dialogue that Quint was the father, but then again, we are getting everything from an unreliable narrator. It could very well have been the Master.

I also assume that Jessel was pregnant by Quint. Mostly from what Mrs. Grose said about their relationship. Also, the master had gone and left Quint in charge, so I think it probably happened in the master's absence.

I also think that homosexual activity would be common at boarding schools (from seeing movies such as It), but among older boys than Miles. He is very young for sexual activity of any type. I think it might be more likely that he was talking about things and displaying a knowledge that was shocking in a boy so young.

Denise wrote: "I also think that homosexual activity would be common at boarding schools (from seeing movies such as It), but among older boys than Miles. "

If Miles is old enough to be at school, I suspect he's old enough to know what's going on. Bullying was rampant, and he would probably have been a victim of bullying and perhaps bullying with a sexual component. But you may be right that the issue with him was that he knew too much, or maybe said too much. At any rate, I do agree with those who think that sexual issues were the most likely reason for him to have been expelled without explanation, though of course it could have been something else.

Here's an excerpt from a Wikipedia article on pederasty. I use care in relying on Wikipedia, but this excerpt has several footnotes, which is encouraging.

"In England, public boarding schools, with its homosocial environment, often encouraged an homoerotic atmosphere, due to the emphasis on the Classics, and homosexual relations were formed and quietly accepted, both between the older and younger boys and even between the teachers and the boys. However, there had been some scandals around such relationships. In the mid-19th century, William Johnson Cory, a renowned master at Eton from 1845 until his forced resignation in 1872, evolved a style of pedagogic pederasty which influenced a number of his pupils. His Ionica, a work of poetry reflecting his pederastic sensibilities, was read in intellectual circles and “made a stir” at Oxford in 1859.[81] Oscar Browning, another Eton master and former student of Cory, followed in his tutor’s footsteps, only to be likewise dismissed in 1875. Both are thought to have influenced Oxford don Walter Pater, whose aesthetics promoted pederasty as the truest expression of classical culture.[82]"

The full article is at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederast...
Go to 6.7.4 for the section on post-classical England.

Becky wrote: "I have trouble believing that an openly homosexual child in Victorian England would face no reprecussions at school, particularly if they were caught being immodest with another child. Other studen..."

Nobody was really 'openly' anything during the 19th century because the idea of 'coming out'/ living 'openly' only appeared later, in the context of modern struggles for civil rights etc. Really terrible bullying / hazing which descended into sexual abuse / rape was not entirely unusual in boarding schools, neither was physical and sexual abuse from the staff, but it's complicated to relate this to consensual relationships / acts.

I more meant a child that was being sexually explicit, I doubt his orientation mattered. They felt that he was being a harm to others. Perhaps he was the one sexually bullying other children, especially if he had been sexually molested by Quint?

I dont know if this is one of those instances where I should trust scholars that say Victorians would have seen Quint as a child molester. What do others think?