Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw

You hardly ever hear about hysterics nowadays; analysts like to say that the illness has entirely disappeared, replaced by the more ubiquitous ‘personality disorder’, and the likelihood of chancing upon nice bourgeois ladies in the midst of fainting fits as you walk down the main street in town is very low. Yet a mere century ago, the hysteria epidemic raged across Europe and America. In France at least, one in five cases admitted to La Salpetriere in Paris – the general prison-cum-madhouse – was a case of hysteria, and as late as the 1950s, one American psychoanalyst declared that ‘if after five minutes with a patient you find yourself gripping the arms of your chair, then the patient is a hysteric.’ So where has hysteria gone? Well, the rush of novels about hysterics at the turn of the century suggests that hysteria was a very particular battleground in the war between the sexes; it arose as a form of female rebellion that was also an act of self-defeat, and came to be understood as an expression of all that a woman during that era could not say and could not do. Although medical evidence suggested that both sexes could be hysterics, it became irrevocably associated with women, due to its symptom portrait of hyposexuality, flirtatiousness, manipulativeness and extreme emotionality which doctors associated with an excessive, ‘negative’ femininity. The first wave of feminist thinking argued instead it was a response to extreme powerlessness and a misogynistic reading of women’s sexuality. In fact the symptoms were often more reminiscent of a feverish illness, and included hallucinations, nervous coughs, exhaustion and local paralysis. Freud cut his analytic teeth on hysterics, indeed, attributed his discovery of the unconscious to listening to their tales. He felt that the sign of a hysteric was an incoherent and discontinuous narrative. A story of gaps and lacunae and contradictions. Hysterics for Freud were resistance fighters, guarding a secret (in his opinion of a sexual nature – in the opinion of later feminists, of a political one) that he would patiently prise out of them. Once found, the story could then make sense. Mental health, for Freud, became equated with narrative coherency.

The figure of the governess holds a privileged position in hysterical stories, mostly because of the complicated relationship she must hold to the master of the house as asexual replacement mother. This is beautifully exemplified in Henry James’s classic tale The Turn of the Screw. It’s told as a ghost story recounted to a company of men sitting around a fire one evening at a country house, and it details the experience of a governess, sent by a mysterious Master to an isolated house called Bly. There she must care for two children, Miles and Flora, of whom he is the guardian. This Master demands that she take full responsibility for, and authority over, the children, for he does not want to be contacted by her for any reason. The governess proceeds to fall in love with the beauty and the purity of the children in a way that seems excessive and uncomfortably adulatory, although there are plenty of indications that the children are not especially innocent, not least Miles’s unexplained expulsion from his school. Shortly after her arrival at Bly the governess starts to see unexplained figures; a man on top of a tower, a woman by a lake, and then she sees the same man pressed up against a window, looking in. In her fear and anxiety she turns to the housekeeper, Mrs Grose, who identifies these figures as Peter Quint and Miss Jessel, former servants of the house, scandalous lovers, and now deceased. In the grip of a frenzy, the governess becomes convinced that the ghostly pair are after the innocent souls of the children, and her narrative takes on an increasingly hysterial tone as she mounts a campaign of vigilance against the spirits that sucks all around her in to a vortex of fear and suspicion. I won’t describe the outcome, but you’ll not be surprised to learn there are no happy endings.

The central ambiguity of the story, then, concerns the sightings of the ‘ghosts’. Are they ‘real’ and out to corrupt the children, or are they simply figments of the governess’s troubled, hysterical mind? The hysterical reading of the governess’s position is quite convincing: James makes us very aware of her inexperience and the heavy burden of responsibility which the Master places on her shoulders with no one other than the radically silly Mrs Grose to help her. He also makes us aware of the way she shoulders the burden out of a repressed love for the distant, unknowable Master. We could see then, how an excessive cultural demand for her own purity, as that Victorian cliché Virginia Woolf so despised, the Angel of the House, leads to a disquieting split of her own emotions. Romantic idealization, felt for the Master but with no place to go, becomes projected onto the children. Forbidden sexuality, felt for the Master but repressed for it has no place to go and is culturally despised, becomes projected onto the ghosts. Sexuality is utterly confused with evil in this tale, as the issue revolves around the suspected moral corruption of the children by the dubious duo of Quint and Jessel. Yet these are children who stand on the brink of adolescence, and the supercharged defensive instincts of the governess could also be seen as aimed to prevent the children’s natural development. That purity and innocence she so prizes will inevitably be lost as the children grow and take their rightful place as sexualized adults. The secrets that she fears Quint and Jessel wish to whisper in their ears will have to become known to them at some point or other. The essence of Quint and Jessel could be said to exist already within the children, and the governess’s attempt to eradicate it can be seen to have severe consequences for the health and well-being of Flora and Miles.

So there’s plenty of justification for reading this as a classic late nineteenth century tale of hysteria, except of course that the whole story is framed and played out on one level as a terrifying tale of supernatural phenomenon. Well over a hundred books and articles have been written around this slight story, arguing vociferously in both directions. Yet I think there’s an interesting middle way. Freud thought that hysteria was linked to narrative insufficiency, to an inability to tell a full story, to tell a tale that was full of gaps and inconsistencies. If we follow Freud here, then it’s possible to think of The Turn of the Screw as not simply a narrative that might be about hysteria, but as a hysterical narrative: one whose unresolvable ambiguity indicates an inability to tell itself clearly. The odd, ungraspable linguistic style of Henry James, and the indeterminate plotline that could be a ghost story or the account of a mental breakdown, seems to indicate a tale that cannot help but draw attention to its own internal contradictions. If this is a hysterical text, then the way we read it becomes an issue in itself. Do we, like Freud, attempt to fill in the gaps and assign the story a coherence it doesn’t have, by insisting we resolve the ambiguity and decide once and for all whether it’s a ghost story or a case history? Do we, in other words, need to cure the story? Or do we celebrate its very open-endedness, its resistance to any form of masterful analysis and allow it to maintain its paradoxes? Whichever it may be, it’s true to say that in good hysterical fashion, it’s a story that demands a response from the reader, who may well find themselves clutching the arms of their chair by the tale’s alarming climax.

About these ads

11 thoughts on “Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw

  1. Intellectually, I’d say I would celebrate the story’s open-endedness and paradoxes, but on a more emotional or gut level, I want to figure it out! The impulse to “cure” the story is almost irresistable.

  2. One of my favorites. I want to believe in the ghosts, but I just love the open-endedness and paradoxes and going back and forth and in and out around what I think is really happening. I feel the same way about THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE. And last year, I discovered another wonderful story of hysteria, THE VICTORIAN CHAISE LONGUE by Marghanita Laski. If you haven’t read it, drop everything and do so. Yea. Halloween is coming. I tend to re-read all these things in October.

  3. Fantastic post! Your summing up and contextualizing of hysteria is a thing of beauty. I haven’t read “The Turn of the Screw” (I tend to avoid the scary stuff!) but I’m keen to do so now.

  4. How I wish you had been able to come and teach my American Gothic class this past spring when we read TTOTS! I think you are exactly right when you say that this is a hysterical narrative. James does not allow for any firm place for his readers to base their understanding of the story. He enfolds the narrative in so many layers of ambiguity that we are left with–what?–a story where nothing is known, even after reading it. And the frames add to the hysterical narrative (how I love this idea!): There is the narrator, who is telling the story that is really told by another man, who is supposedly reading from the governess’s manuscript. Complicating all of this is the second narrator’s infatuation with the governess, so we don’t know if he himself is not invested somehow in the hysteria. A mind-twisting story, but you do a fabulous reading!

  5. I’m with Emily – if you get a chance read the Victorian Chaise Longue. Very creepy and good. I actually just bought Turn of the Screw and am really looking forward to it. I’ve seen the PBS production of it and loved it.

  6. Interesting reading of the story, I’ve not thought about it in that way before. I haven’t read it in a long time. Next time I do I will definitely have a new perspective on it!

  7. I remember studying this in a literature course in undergrad, and I so specifically recall my teacher so demonstrative on the story. I can still here her say “So, with every TURN OF THE SCREW, the tension is racheted up.” Believe it or not, she had reading similar to yours and we discussed it a possibly hysterical novel. Incidentally a very popular television show over here (Lost) features this book in many s cenes, and it caused a rash of people to buy out local bookstores and read it to try and figure out how it ‘fit’ into the tv show.

    I think I’ll revisit this text as well. I enjoyed reading and learnign about it so much the first time that I look forward to another reading!

  8. I’ve never watched Lost – perhaps I should? And thanks so much for the book suggestions – I’ll be looking them up, never fear! I’d also love to teach a class called American Gothic – how cool would that be? (Actually, Bikeprof, the effects of the frame on the narrative that you discuss are extremely interesting, in particular in light of the H. G. Wells story that is also a frame narrative. I don’t often think about frames, and you’re right that they can be very illuminating.)

  9. I only just skimmed over this post when it first appeared because I was planning on reading TotS. I’ve just finished and thought it brimming with sexuality, so am somewhat relieved to read that it’s there on the story, not just in my head. All the while I found myself wanting to figure the story out — as much as I love the idea of open-endedness and ambiguity, it seems my instinct is to cure it. I think it’s clear that Miles was dismissed from school for sexually inappropriate behaviour. Will have to think more on what the “internal contradictions” are and post on this myself shortly.

  10. Like Isabella, I’ve been reading Turn of the Screw on the train in to work. This post is extremely helpful, particularly your counsel to forgo finding a “cure” for the gaps in the story. I think it’s quite possible to read this story as having a great deal to do with James himself — the governess’s idealization and demonization of children and childhood is something that seems quite in keeping with James’s own life. I don’t know if you’ve read Colm Toibin’s The Master, but that and Leon Edel’s wonderful biographical work on James make me wonder if maybe James and the governess have quite a bit in common: the pulling back from sex and intimacy is one obvious parallel as is the early death of an innocent who’s been exposed to sex. I know that biographical readings can be reductive and so not particularly helpful in discerning what a story is about, but in this case, I’m really struck by how much of James can be located in this story. I’m not quite finished with my reading, but am happy to get through to the end with your post in the back of my mind. Many thanks, BL (Your archives are a gold mine, dear Litlove!)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s