Literary Horror discussion

Looking forward to this- it's been such a long time since I've read The Turn of the Screw, and I'm more than a little embarrassed to admit I haven't read James's other ghostly short stories.

Randolph wrote:

I've only read Screw, Edmund Orme, and The Jolly Corner.

Those and “The Romance of Certain Old Clothes” for me. I don’t think the others are as frequently anthologized.

I'm reading only The Turn of the Screw, the second Norton critical edition, published in 1999, for now. Since the story was originally published in 1898, that makes it 119 years old. According to my edition's Preface, this book has historically had a lot of people write about it because from just reading the text alone it's notoriously difficult to figure out exactly what happened, what's real and what isn't. The story also raised a lot of moral issues.

The editors of the preface recommend bringing three key questions to a reading of the text. (I'll hide them in case people just want to first read the story without giving these questions any thought.) (view spoiler)[The first big question contemporary readers of the tale tried to determine once and for all is, "Are the ghosts real or figments of the governess's imagination?" The second question is, "Does the text provide a definitive answer?" Finally, "How reliable is the governess as a narrator?" (hide spoiler)]

Here's to enjoying a challenging (but short-just 85 pages in my edition) May read!

Reading James' writing in this story is like watching a beautiful Porsche being driven over the edge of a cliff.

I've read the story and am now most of the way through the 200 pages of literary criticism that followed it (in my edition). From reading through James's comments on the story and what critics have said, it's impossible to say with certainty what James's intentions are for the story. There are three possibilities, it seems, each the increasingly likely explanation. I am going to put the rest of this post behind a spoiler curtain because if you have not finished reading the story first, reading my post before you do would alter your perception of the story as you read it. (view spoiler)[

1) James just intended to write a ghost story. All of his comments in subsequent letters taken at face value point to this conclusion except for one or two that only hint that more may have been going on. Most of the contemporary criticism to James had this perspective, though with reservations. They all noted that the governess seemed more than a little "off".

2) James wanted to leave things ambiguous, to intentionally write the story so that both views could be supported. Randolph and many critics in the first and middle thirds of the twentieth century take this view. It fits with what post-modernists such as Woolf through Fowles did in their writing. James was just an ahead of his time example. The problem with this view it that not only does this conflict with James's comments on his story, but there are problems in the text that make the view implausible. For example, at one point in the story both the governess and Mrs. Grose feel a physical coldness or breeze caused by the ghosts. There are a few other problem passages that make denying the ghosts' reality within the story difficult.

3) The more recent belief is that James is toying with his audience deliberately by depicting the story solely through the lens of the governess's mental illness. By writing the story so solidly from the governess's point of view the reader can never get a firm grasp on what is really happening because the governess herself doesn't have a firm grasp. The narrative of the story makes it seem like she does. James is careful to give her voice full authority to tell readers the reality, which we presume she does. Nevertheless, it's the reality of an insane person that we are told. It's a real ghost story to the governess, and just as mental illness can make something ludicrous convincingly real to a mentally ill person, the story is told just that way so that we come to believe the impossible is taking place the same as the governess does.

It's my opinion that James's depiction of an insane person's delusion as reality is the most horrifying aspect of the story. How far really are any of us from quietly slipping into madness? The boy's death is a logical outcome of being sucked into an insane lover's delusion. The story hits close to home in a very discomfiting manner. (hide spoiler)]

My review, such as it is, of the book is now posted: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... I found it daunting to offer my views after reading almost 200 pages of literary criticism on the book written by people far more perceptive than me; so I kept it short.

Randolph wrote: "There are a dearth of comments and discussion this month. Either the book was too literary, too familiar, or too dull to most group members; maybe all three."

I plan to read these stories a little later this month. I had some other things I needed to get out of the way but I do expect to participate here as I am a big James fan and haven't read some of these stories in years.

Suggestion: For June we could always have a poll on some award winners and read the one that gets the most votes from us. I'd nominate the latest Aurealis and Shadow Lands winner The Grief Hole by Kaaron Warren.

'The Grief Hole' sounds very interesting. I'd be willing to read that.

Randolph wrote: "Does anyone have any views on The Jolly Corner? This is probably my second favorite after Screw."

When I read TJC in college, 40-some years ago, I recall having a good understanding of the story. When I read it again a few years ago, I found myself unable to follow the narrative as I did before, and thus unable to extract any meaning.

Edit: So it could be interesting to see how I take the story on the third read.

I didn't get to read the story but I've seen at least three film versions and still don't really get the ending. I don't think I ever thought the ghosts weren't real...as for the governess being mad, well maybe that's true as well.

I have read "The Jolly Corner" but don't remember anything about it.

Kaaron Warren is great; disappointed that this new book is a "Smashwords" release.

I'm around 40% done on the Wordsworth edition (the one referenced in the original post).

The first story, 'The Romance of Certain Old Clothes' reminded me greatly of Washington Irving. It revels in that same deliberately antique, old-timey New England feeling Irving so loved and ends in slightly gory melodrama (again, very Irving-like). It's not in any way a bad story, it's just not a particularly Jamesian story. 'The Ghostly Rental' is marginally more subtle but this reminds me more of Hawthorne than James.

The third story, 'Sir Edmund Orme' is the charm, and recognizable features of James' writing become clear here (abiding interest in female characters, deep psychological states, and complex interrelationships that worry the protagonists throughout the tale). This one still ends a bit melodramatically but the overall structure and feeling of this story is quite different from the first two (less deliberately quaint, much less obviously "American") and James' mature style is more in evidence.

'The Private Life' is altogether different. Here James shows his greatest gifts-the ability to manage a moderately large cast of characters through a single narrative voice and to map a very complex web of relationships through a single keenly observant eye. The James narrator is like no other; he (presumably-frequently we never get confirmation of any kind of sex/gender of a James narrator-we can assume, but we can't know for sure) assures of his bias while somehow providing us with an almost omniscient view. It's a very delicate balance and James does it so well. This particular story is probably one of the greatest doppelganger tales ever written; it's subtle and ambiguous and, to my mind, all the sadder and more horrifying for that.

This was one of my favorite ghost stories growing up, it is a very deep read, touching on abuse, and scare the heck out of me.