Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Sarah's avatar

Okay, I'm going to try to put my thoughts into words. This is SO HARD with this book - just the way the characters talk makes that impossibly difficult! Everything is only alluded to, almost never spoken outright. Even the moments of relief that the Governess describes as bringing things into the open feel like they're still obscuring the truth.

Some of this seems to be cultural - for example, the final confrontation suggested to me that part of the reason the Governess never confronted Miles about what he'd done at school was her own weird flightiness and insistence on putting him up on a pedestal. But in addition to that, she (and Mrs. Grose) have an equally strong reluctance to accuse him of anything, because it is Simply Not Done to directly accuse a gentleman of dishonorable conduct. Even suggesting he could be "vulgar" is a profound insult permissible only in the face of incontrovertible proof. And we *still* never actually learn what he said. Of course, James is using these obscuring rules of etiquette in the service of his narrative. But there were many times when I couldn't quite tell where the Governess' unreliability ended and an understandable-to-the-contemporary-reader genteel obfuscation began.

The Governess and Mrs. Grose's reluctance to speak about exactly what it was Quint and Jessel were supposed to have conspired to do to the children is the biggest gap, to me. This is a place where the understanding of class baked into the book is just totally foreign. I felt like there was so much I was intended to understand about Quint and Jessel's relationship, the circumstances of their parting, and their influence on the children that went completely over my head.

Maybe this is completely out of left field, or something I'm getting entirely from my own modern sensibilities - but I wondered early on if there was some implication that Quint and Jessel were, in some way, grooming or abusing the children. Maybe the idea that too much time around a "menial" and his scandalous girlfriend could turn children into evil monsters was totally commonplace at the time this was written -- maybe just hearing that a young upper-class boy hung out with a [gasp] servant-class rake would make people sob and faint with horror, and it's no worse than that. But I found myself looking for proof of my theory - wondering if Miles had done something unspeakable to other children, if the strange, manipulative "corruption" the Governess saw in them was a sign of psychological damage, if her delusion and overprotection was her being so overcome with horror at the idea, she was unable to cope.

Expand full comment
Rick LaReau's avatar

While there are indeed ambiguities and mysteries to ponder, one point seemed immediately clear, the ghosts are real. I felt a sense of it in the setup, with the household characters hiding something, and the uncle claiming so strongly not to bother him with anything, as though he knew there would be supernatural trouble. But then the governess describes the ghost she's seen for the 2nd time to the housekeeper, who clearly recognizes the man as the deceased valet. (I would later find that exact argument used to counter the original proposal to the "insane governess" theory, proposed for the first time 40 years after the publication of the story.) Assuming the housekeeper is at that point not just making it up, for some reason giving the governess's oddly specific description of her ghost a foot in reality, we can only conclude she saw a real face.

Expand full comment
23 more comments...

No posts