Wet and Aggressive Corella challenges Magpie

Wet and Aggressive Corella challenges Magpie

Friday 3 April 2015

NaNoReMo

March was NaNoReMo - or National Novel Reading Month.  Specifically, a month for us to read a classic novel that for one reason or another we have been putting off.  Essentially NaNoReMo is a support system.  It isn't a book club and participants choose their own book - which may or may not be one read by other participants.  At the end (or earlier) participants blog or tweet about their experience.  I don't tweet, so blogging it is.
John Wiswell gave me the impetus to play and I have joined him, and others.

The classic I chose this time is The Turn of the Screw by Henry James.


 The novella was first published over a hundred years ago in 1898.  It has apparently been the subject of several film and television adaptions and a Benjamin Britten opera, all of which have passed me by.

It appears simple.  Members of a house-party are gathered around a fire on Christmas Eve, telling ghost stories.  One of the party says that he knows a truly terrible tale.  Pushed to share it, he says he has to send away for the written account.  Written not by him, but by his sister's governess.  A woman he obviously fell in love with.  A woman he respects and values.  He remained her friend until her death.

The story is duly sent for, and read to the houseparty.

It is written in the first person, by an unnamed young woman who has accepted her first position as a governess.  Her charges are two orphaned children.  Their parents died in India, and they were given into the guardianship of their uncle, our narrator's employer.

The children had been in the care of a young lady, who had died.  The little girl was currently being cared for by the housekeeper, and the boy had been sent to school - but was due to start holidays.

She accepts the position, but is told that she will have to go to the house in the country where he has placed them and she is to have supreme authority.  With a most peculiar condition.   '... she should never trouble him - but never, never: neither appeal nor complain nor write about anything; only meet all questions herself.'

The children are beautiful.  Angelic looking, intelligent, eager to please.  Our narrator is given a letter from the boy's headmaster which says that the school refuses to have him back after the holidays.  No reason is given - and she cannot contact her employer.  Miles is such a charming child that she assumes the headmaster made an error.

Soon she begins to feel a malign presence.  First she sees a man, where no man could be.  In consultation with the housekeeper she identifies him as Peter Quint, her employers valet - now deceased.  She is convinced that he wants the children.  Later, she sees a further apparition, Miss Jessel, the woman who had cared for the children and died. 

She becomes convinced that the children are  in mortal danger from the ghosts. 

Later she decides that the children are in cahoots with the apparitions and are deceiving her, charming and angelic as they seem.  She challenges the girl, wresting her away from Miss Tressel.  The girl becomes ill, and develops an immense distaste for and fear of the narrator.  She is sent away to her uncle, leaving the narrator alone with the boy.

Who dies, in the final confrontation between the governess and the spectre of the valet.

So we have a traumatised small girl, and a dead boy.  Why?  Who is responsible?  Is it our narrator, or the supernatural.  Will the small girl recover?  How did the governess explain the death of the other child?  And explain it she obviously did, because we know she continued to work as a governess.

This book reminded me of a jigsaw puzzle one of my brothers gave me.  A two sided jig-saw puzzle.  The picture on the front is identical to the picture on the back but has been rotated ninety degrees. 
As I try and put the pieces of the novella together, I can't help feeling that I am trying to squeeze pieces from one side of the puzzle into the other.  They simply don't fit, and don't add up.

Our narrator admits that she is impressionable.  I suspect her narrative is unreliable.  She becomes obsessive about keeping the children with either her or the house-keeper at all times.  Is she sane?  Or not?
No-one other than her sees (or admits to seeing) the ghosts.  Do they exist?  What do they want of the children?  My deliberations are not helped by the fact that my wandering mind is wondering what killed the parents in India...

Henry James himself apparently described it as a 'trap for the unwary'.

And trapped I assuredly became and remain, to the extent that I am not certain whether it is a ghost story, a story of supernatural possession or an illustration of obsession and insanity.

Has anyone else read it?  And what do you think?

I should add that I don't regret reading it.  Any work which leaves me wondering, thinking or questioning trumps a book which I close and forget. 



113 comments:

  1. how very strange indeed, now you have me curious, is that how it ends?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Linda Starr: The ending is very ambiguous. Very, very ambiguous.

      Delete
  2. I remember it all, now. From college. Except who done it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joanne Noragon: Hopefully someone will remember.

      Delete
  3. I haven't read that book, but I must say you've sparked my interest.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lon Anderson: Your wiccan sensitivites might be able to extract more from it than I can.

      Delete
  4. Cool! I'll have to check it out. =D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RaShelle Workman: I hope you do - and can make more definitive decisions about it than I can.

      Delete
  5. No, but I am certainly intrigued now!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alex J. Cavanaugh: Given all you have on your overflowing plate at the moment I am amazed you found time to visit this post. Thank you. And yes, intriguing is a fair description.

      Delete
  6. No I haven't read that one, and I'm not likely to either. Oh well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bob Bushell: The birds you give us are much less confusing.

      Delete
  7. Perhaps a second read will make it clearer for you. Not having read it I am intrigued, but think I would be troubled afterwards too. It sounds as though children were not highly valued though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Carol: I have read parts of it twice while I wrestled with it. And am still confuddled. Children in the 1840s were certainly treated very differently. Our narrator fell in love with her charges, but I am not certain whether it was a positive thing or not.

      Delete
  8. I didn't know that March was the month to catch up on classics we missed. I like that idea- and I did read a classic I had missed, The Glass Menagerie.

    I am glad this novella was so interesting and that it left you thinking. It does sound interesting! Thanks for sharing. :)
    ~Jess

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DMS ~ Jess: A month to catch up on classics is brilliant isn't it? I wasn't aware of it either until John Wiswell introduced the concept to me last year, but am happy to play.

      Delete
  9. I just ordered a Kindle copy on Amazon--free!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. fishducky: Please let me know what you think.

      Delete
  10. Haven't read it either. But it sounds interesting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Teresa: Interesting it is. Discomforting too - but not dull.

      Delete
  11. Dear EC
    I saw an adaptation of this a couple of years ago and it totally scared me to the point of giving me nightmares. The governess was in a mental institution and told the story from her point of view but it was still very difficult to work out who was telling the truth and whether, in fact, she had gone insane and had invented the whole thing. (I believe the governess was played by Michelle Dockery who is now known for playing Lady Mary in Downton Abbey.)
    On a lighter note, I received my copy of The Land of Green Ginger which I read in an evening and loved (of course!). Meeting Nosi Parka and Sinbad's son was a delight. However, in my particular copy, some of the illustrations were so darkly printed as to blot out any of the details, which I thought was a pity.
    I still love it though - it makes me chuckle! When I read it to my niece and nephew when they were little, sometimes I had to stop and draw breath as I was laughing so much - especially over the 'no pencil' incident!
    Thank you so much for letting me know about the new edition.
    Best wishes
    Ellie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ellie Foster: It seems I am not alone. Which is a little reassuring.
      On the Green Ginger front, I am so sorry that the illustrations in your copy are less than stellar. The book I grew up with WAS the full version and I have always love Nosi Parker and Sinbad's son. I can see that neither are necessary - but both are fun. Lots of fun.

      Delete
  12. I read this years ago in college and remember not caring for it. It was a small book but very hard for me to get through for class! I am glad you got some good out of it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bookie: I doubt I would have cared for it years ago. I am a lot more comfortable with ambiguity these days.

      Delete
  13. I've never heard of it, but I do suffer from a lifetime of uncouthness:)

    Thanks for the review... and you have me intrigued... I'm also a big fan of books that leave me thinking as I close the back cover!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark Koopmans: A lifetime of uncouthness? You conceal it admirably.
      And yes, the best books do leave us thinking. And thinking...

      Delete
  14. it is on my list to read. I read another Henry James novella while on a solo paddle in December. You make it sound like I should read it sooner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. sage: What an interesting thought. I wonder what I would choose to read on solo paddles... Jonathan Raban leapt to mind immediately, but that could be too obvious.
      Let me know what you think when/if you get to it please.

      Delete
  15. I've re-read it several times, and the conclusion I reached was: It's an early psychological study of a novella, something at which James was exceedingly good at. The ghostly elements were definitely a trap for the unwary... but served to point up the nature of the hysteria which overtook the governess (an impressionable and isolated young woman with far too much responsibility for traumatised youngsters),
    I believe James did a masterful job of showing how such hysteria festers and spreads in isolation, feeding upon itself, and that reader was meant to believe that the boy... who may have fed the governess' fears as a malicious prank in the beginning, later succumbed to the almost swampy miasma of hysteria, and died of fear.

    Then again, I could well be wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jacquelineand...: I thought along similar lines. However, the piece of the jigsaw that I couldn't make fit here is the fact that the narrator continues to work as a governess. How do we get from impressionable hysteric who is damaged and damaging to a respected and valued educator? Do you see my problem?

      Delete
    2. I do EC, and had the same problem... perhaps I was wrong in assuming that it was a literary contrivance for introducing the atmosphere of the story.
      Or, and I wondered this as well, perhaps the boy didn't die after all, and is now a man telling a tale he's embarassed to reveal that he was so deeply involved in.

      Delete
    3. Jacquelineand...: I thought about the literary contrivance and dismissed it as cheating. I hadn't considered that Miles survived. A whole new kettle of fish. Any book which sets minds wandering this far has to be considered a success story.

      Delete
  16. I've heard of that book before, but now I think I need to actually read it. I'm a fan of unreliable narrators. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David P. King: Unreliable narrators are most of us when all is said and done. I like them myself. Faulkener excelled at them.

      Delete
  17. I too was able to get it on my Kindle for free, and I'll read it and let you know what I think. The comments left by others have made me very interested in the book. :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DJan: It isn't a comfortable read, or really a pleasant one - but not one I can dismiss either. I will be interested to hear what you think.

      Delete
  18. Wow! Interesting. I think I'd like to read it, even though I typically don't like loose ends. And I do so love my happy endings. LOL. Thanks for sharing. I think I will go download it. http://untetheredrealms.blogspot.com.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gwen Gardner: A happy ending it is not - for anyone. Which I hadn't fully realised till I came to answer your comment. And the ends, and the threads preceding the end are definitely loose. I hope you will enjoy it (though enjoy is not the word I want...)

      Delete
  19. I keep thinking I have read it, but realize that most likely I saw a movie version of the book.
    Any book with Henry James written on the cover is a must read. thanks for writing such a perfect fish hook.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Susan Kane: You, like me are a confirmed bookaholic. Both of us will jump to the smallest fly, hooks are unnecessary.

      Delete
  20. That sounds like a spooky read that would keep me up at night to read and then to try to recover from!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. kim: It is a short book, and relatively quick to read. The recovery period is longer though... Quite a bit longer for me.

      Delete
  21. It sounds like a chilling and psychologically challenging read. I'm not fond of loose ends when a story's done, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christine Rains: The more I think about it, the more I realise that there are very few solid beginnings OR endings in this tricky little piece. Still thinking about it, some time later, some books later.

      Delete
  22. No, I've never read that one but it's tempting to do so. Perhaps not a good read before turning out the light to go to sleep at night.
    I remember years ago reading The Haunting of Toby Jugg which had the hairs on the back of my neck standing on end. Now I'm wondering what happened to my copy of that book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mimsie: No, not a good immediately before sleeping book. The Haunting of Toby Jugg is not one I have heard of. I will investigate.

      Delete
    2. The Haunting of TJ is one of Dennis Wheatley's who of course is known for his thrillers and occult novels. Phil does not like his type of story one little bit and yet he can read The Hobbit etc and quite enjoy it while I find them difficult to follow or understand. We are all so different in our literary choices.

      Delete
    3. Mimsie: Thank you. The skinny one read Dennis Wheatley - but he was never to my taste. I, like Phil, lean more towards The Hobbit. I love that different tastes can be met.

      Delete
  23. I love Henry James and this was one of my favorites.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Riot Kitty: You are stronger than I am. I have to ask though - what do you think happened?

      Delete
  24. Rats! I missed it! i'll try to read one before the next NaNoReMo comes around!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. daisyfae: The good thing is that the classics can be anything we decide. And if you were to read The Land of Green Ginger - that would count.

      Delete
  25. I have never read that! Thanks for the review, it's definitely piqued my interest! Will add it to my kindle. Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 1st Man: Will you report back? Please. I really would like some other perspectives.

      Delete
  26. How can I have missed this novella - I must read it. Sounds fascinating!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ladyfi: As I have said to everyone else who expressed an interest, if you do read it, I would love to know what you think of it.

      Delete
  27. I have a feeling I'll do poorly with the jigsaw puzzle. Haha!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tammy Theriault: I did very, very poorly with the jigsaw. It was a truly vicious gift.

      Delete
  28. I've never read it and now I choose to never read it. it would be much too confusing for me. your 90* jigsaw sounds confusing too. I was once given one where the picture was similar to the box cover, but forward in time by several years so the people and items were all slightly different. I never did get that one done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. River: I never finished the jigsaw either. I don't think I even got the edges complete. An epic fail. I think the one you were given would have been too much for me as well.

      Delete
  29. I've read it several times and every time felt differently about the story. It can be read several ways -as the actual truth, as a tissue of lies told by a psychopath or perhaps something between the two. It is an intriguing but unpleasant tale. The sexual aspects of the story (Peter Quint and his mistress taking over the bodies of a two children, a brother and sister, with its implication of incest) is very dark, even if this is only in the mind of the governess. James is hard to read, anyway. I read Portrait of a Lady twice, but only because I had nothing else to read. It is also unpleasant!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. lynners: How nice to hear that someone else finds James difficult. And that someone else read this on several levels - none of them pleasant. I wondered about the darkness (re Quint and his mistress) if it is just in the narrator's mind. Where did she learn to view the world that way. Which added another dark layer.

      Delete
  30. Sounds like a very interesting topic!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sienna Smythe: Very dark though. Not dull, but dark.

      Delete
  31. I've skimmed the comments (didn;t want to risk a spoiler!) as it's more than 50 years since I read this and almost as many years since I saw a film, a play and a brilliant (in my opinion) prequel(hideous word) on TV in England.

    So...in my memory I'm afraid the details are muddled so I need to read it again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. dinahmow: I will be interested in hearing from you after the revisit. And wonder whether your older self will take quite a different perspective. I am pretty certain I would.

      Delete
  32. Me again...just remembered (and Googled to confirm) "The Nightcomers" was the prequel film.Over 40 years ago, but still spookily in my mind.Should be available in good video shops.Stellar cast, with Marlon Brandon leading.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. dinahmow: I think I will pass. Spooky images don't sit comfortably with me.

      Delete
  33. the journey [through the book] especially as you have written it, seems more important than a solution to these many questions. You made good use of your hours, S



    ALOHA from Honolulu,
    ComfortSpiral
    =^..^=

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cloudia: Never-ending journeys. Through so many books. Mind you, there are a LOT of people who would suggest (do suggest) that I waste time. Their problem.

      Delete
  34. I haven't heard of this novel. It sounds brilliant and scary. I got the chills just reading your description.

    Thanks for the review, EC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rawkynrobyn: It is dark. And frightening. Whichever solution you accept...

      Delete
  35. Oh very nice... I'll be checking out :) I like.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. T.F. Walsh: I hope you like it. And can explain it to me.

      Delete
  36. I like writing unreliable narrators but I think my head would hurt reading this. It does sound intriguing though. Drat. Now I'm going to keep thinking about this book! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. River Fairchild: Have some punch. Have some more. And some more. Thinking? Wass that?

      Delete
  37. Pues ni idea... Espero que pases buenos días... Un abrazo desde Murcia...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. alp: Thank you. I am lost too. I hope you have a wonderful day too.

      Delete
  38. I saw the movie from the book, a very old movie, and it was strange, but not scary by today's standards, I'd say. It didn't completely hold my attention. I've not read the book.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Strayer: If it was true to the book it would be quite strange. I wonder which perspective they filmed it from.

      Delete
  39. I saw the film on Netflix, my mum, my sis and I, we couldn't stop looking. It was beautifully filmed and so tragic!!!

    I think the movie followed the book, I'm not sure, but it felt that way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guyana-Gyal: I haven't seen any of the adaptations - but it would have to be tragic.

      Delete
  40. I need to finish reading Don Quixote! I think I will, now! Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guyana-Gyal: There are a lot of classics lurking in my unread towers. I will get to them. Slowly.

      Delete
    2. I've just realised, I've been reading more non-Western books...more West Indian (is that non-Western?), more poetry, and I tend to dip, quite often, into my favourite book by Zora Neale Hurston.

      Delete
    3. Guyana-Gyal: My reading changes often. I need to read more poetry though. Soon.

      Delete
  41. I have found over the years that I need to be very careful what I read or it will haunt me for a long time - years, even. So I appreciate the review as it gives me a chance to make the choice not to read it! I do hope some others who have read it will chime in and give their impressions and interpretations.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. jenny_o: If asked I would have said I am not a visual person, but it is often the things I see rather than those I read or hear which haunt me. And yes, sometimes for years.

      Delete
  42. I'm with jenny-o I get scared and can't seem to escape my mind.
    I try to stay away from scary/head trippy things but you are really selling it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sonya Ann: It is clever, it is nasty, it is confusing, it is dark. If any of those things will stay with you, perhaps you are better off leaving it on the shelf.

      Delete
  43. This sounds like an intriguing book - no, I haven't read it but I'll have to put it on my list. NaNoReMo - I hadn't heard of that before and automatically thought you meant NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month)! Learned something today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oneminnesotawriter: NoNoReMo is a wonderful idea isn't it? I don't know about you, but there are always classics lurking in my unread tower(s).

      Delete
  44. Replies
    1. Romance Reader: Fascinating, difficult, confronting, confusing...

      Delete
  45. This is an excellent review but I would probably scare myself silly reading it. I also like endings wrapped up in a neat little bow, I am very boring I know :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DeniseinVA: This is not a review. I don't know enough to do the book justice. It is a reflection of my journey, my confusion, and a plea for help. I don't have to have all of the ends tied off tidily, but like either the ends or the beginnings to be firm.
      And no, you are a very long way from boring.

      Delete
  46. Sound very different.
    I like a good mystery with a few ghosts thrown in.
    Merle..........

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Merlesworld: This is darker than much of my reading. And yes, different.

      Delete
  47. I haven't read that book but I'm intrigued by the concept of a national novel reading month!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stephanie Faris: Not only national, but international, and I think that many readers have books which have been lingering in the TBR pile for too long.

      Delete
  48. I haven't read it, but I know the story. I should read it. I've read a lot of the classics. I've been told I sometimes write like James. I've read other works by him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. M Pax: If you do, please let me know what you think. I am reading your The Renaissence of Hetty Locklear at the moment. This one isn't Jamesian to me - but intriguing. And more than a little sad.

      Delete
  49. So many years have gone since I read this book....I must do so again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee: When and if you do, please come back and talk to me about it.

      Delete
  50. I have a vague memory of hearing a radio adaptation of this novel, possibly in NZ. Vague but think I was left with a feeling of dread. Because when I read I "see" every detail, I think I may pass up the reading of this book, for my own slightly dodgy peace of mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Carol: I hear you. And yes, dread and discomfort are entirely appropriate - whatever interpretation is put on the book.

      Delete
  51. ***This book reminded me of a jigsaw puzzle one of my brothers gave me. A two sided jig-saw puzzle. The picture on the front is identical to the picture on the back but has been rotated ninety degrees. **

    you should be a book reviewer, darling. xxxx HAPPY EASTER.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My Inner Chick: And a very, very Happy Easter to you. Not a reviewer - just some personal reactions. Hugs.

      Delete
  52. This is the first I have heard of NaNoReMo... sounds like a great idea. I agree with My Inner Chick ... you write an awesome book review! I hate to admit to illiteracy, but I have not read this work by Henry James. Perhaps because I often avoid any book that might give me the shivers !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Susan F.: NaNoReMo is a wonderful idea. And no, you are not illiterate - not by a long way. So many books, so little time. I suspect real reviewers would have the huffs, but thank you.

      Delete
  53. Oh I wish I had known this as I am a voracious reader....and I should grab one and add it to my pile for my next book even if I am a bit late.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Donna@LivingFromHappiness. Never too late. And I too am a greedy reader.

      Delete
  54. So glad you played along, EC!

    I remember thinking James's twists were admirable for his time period, but wasn't drawn in. I grew up with too many modern Horror stories, which made my tastes too demanding. There are still fantastic older Horror novels, like Frankenstein, but the literary elements keep and there's so much intentionality. Even if I didn't enjoy it, though, it's still an utterly respectable work as an artifact of literary tradition.

    ReplyDelete