More handpicked essays just for you.
The turn of the screw is the governess mad
Explanation of the governess desire in the turn of the screw
The turn of the screw is the governess mad
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The turn of the screw is the governess mad
The Governess at first seems to be an innocent young woman with hopes. As the Story continues so do the questions. One particular question that is raised is, is the Governess a mad woman? The first particular piece of evidence of her insanity is her unhealthy obsession with the children, especially Flora. Next, The governess throughout the novel gives clues that she is sexually frustrated, this might have caused her to imagine a big bold man atop the battlement who she figures later that it is the “ghost of Peter Quint.” When the Governess arrives, Mrs grose, Flora and The governess have breakfast as they await the arrival of Miles, at the dinner table Mrs. Grose asks what happened back in London with the uncle and if she was carried away, …show more content…
In a climatic shouting match, the governess tries to make miles confess everything he knows and all he has been hiding. Miles, being irritated and sick of denying every accusation, finally says yes to shut up the Governess about Peter Quint being real. Miles is terrified of the governess as she seems really unstable, she asks him who “He” is to which Miles responds on page 86, “Peter Quint-you devil!” He is calling the Governess devil because of her apparent madness. To which she then gets angry and suffocates him to death or she tries to protect him from the imaginary being and suffocates the poor child until his heart stops. In conclusion the Governess seems to be a normal and hopeful young lady at the beginning. She slowly starts to go mad as she starts to envision ghosts and starts to think the children also see them. The governess is the main Character of The Turn of The Screw. And she clearly is the character that adds a creepy tone to this novel with her insane obsessive questions and actions. This novel can definitely be viewed from other points, but the most straightforward conclusion is that the governess is a mad
The main character, the Governess, is the perfect example of a morally ambiguous character. It is impossible to label her as purely good or evil, and much debate of this novel is on the trustworthiness of her narration. The Governess is a twenty year old daughter of a country parson who accepted the job of caretaker of two children. She's something of a romantic, being swept off her feet by her employer and viewing her job as a kind of calling. However, behind the innocent young woman, there are two ways of viewing her character. Some defend her as a sane heroine, while others claim she is an insane anti-hero...
In conclusion, it is not the ghosts, as the governess suspected, that are corrupting the children, but the governess herself, through her continually worsening hysteria that is corrupting the children. Both Peter Quint and Miss Jessel are not real ghosts that have the peculiar habit of appearing before the governess and the governess alone but they are merely the signs of the fragmenting mental state of the governess.
As humans, we can’t help but to jump to conclusions, but the governess’s assumptions are too misguided and are taken too far without substantial proof. When she first arrives at Bly, she automatically infers that Ms. Grose, although not showing any hint of it, is relieved that the governess is there and simply “wish[es] not to show it” (7). This could be the case, or, as it would seem to any sane person, Ms. Grose could just be unmoved by the governess’s arrival. Her second assumption with Ms. Grose is when they agree on one thing and the governess assumes that “on every question [they should] be quite at one” (9). Some people can hope that a person may have similar ideas to them, but they wouldn’t expect to agree on everything all the time. People understand that we all have different views, but obviously the governess does not. Then, the governess goes on to guess that Miles got kicked out of school because “he’s an injury to others” (11). She has no specific proof that shows he was kicked out for any reason but she is quick to make the inference. She hasn’t talked to the school, the uncle, or even Miles himself to find out what happened, but instead goes along with her own imagination. She also makes many assumptions about the ghost when she hasn’t even been talking to them. She deduces the ghost of Peter Quint “was looking for Miles” but she only had a feeling to base that off of
One issue which, like the rest, can be answered in more than one way is why Mrs. Grose believes in the Governess when she tells her about her ghost encounters. Usually one would second-guess such outlandish stories as the ones that the governess shares throughout the story, yet Mrs. Grose is very quick to believe our borderline-insane narrator. One of the explanations for such behavior could be the underlying fact that Mrs. Grose and the governess have a similar socio-economic background, therefore making them somewhat equal even if the governess does not always seem to think that way. This fact makes them susceptible to trusting and believing each other, and to believing that the ghosts are there, for the people that the ghosts are presenting used to be servants and therefore from a similar socio-economic background. To add on to that, Bruce Robbins proposes in his Marxist criticism of The Turn of the Screw that the idea of a ghost is synonymous to that of a servant, subconsciously making the two lower-class workers of Bly more vulnerable to believe that the ghosts were real; in other words, servants were ghosts....
The issue whether the governess was insane or not may never be solved. Not only because critics seem to be able to find as much evidence as possible to prove their arguments but also, the reliability of the account of the governess colors the whole story with great ambiguity. We are not certain of the state of mind of the governess when she wrote down the story and when she related the story to Douglas. However, as we closely examine the state of mind of the governess, her reliability does appear to be in question. Beidler provided two readings of The Turn of the Screw and in the second one he declared: ¡§the governess saw only what she wanted to see¡¨ (Beidler 9). She was so exhausted from her prolonged insomnia that she envisioned a story with ghosts for herself to fulfill her growth as a governess.
Toward the end of the novel, the governess sees Ms. Jessel and tries to point her out to Flora and Mrs. Grose. However, Mrs. Grose questions the governess by wondering “[w]here on earth does [she] see anything?” (James 70). Even though Mrs. Grose claims that she does not see any figure, it is not certain that she is telling the truth. It is obvious that she is overwhelmed in this scene because Flora is fearful of the governess’ behavior. Mrs. Grose is merely trying to be rational and appeal to Flora’s anxiety over the governess’ temperamental and persuasive attitude. Another argument that could appeal to the governess’ insanity is that she is love struck by the master, causing her to be delusional. This is exemplified through her imagining that the master “would appear…and stand before [her] and smile and approve” (James 15). Nonetheless, she is not imagining any people because in the last scene of the novel, Miles recognizes Peter Quint’s presence by implying to the governess that he is in the room. If the governess was creating the ghosts in her mind, Miles would not verbally notice Peter Quint’s presence in the room. The governess is clearly sane and does not simply imagine the
The governess sees a woman on the other side of the lake and jumps to the conclusion that Flora has seen her and is choosing to act like she didn’t. The child was playing with a boat and had her back turned to the lake. Why would she think that she had to have seen her? There is no proof and does not even ask the child if she saw anything. She automatically assumes it’s Miss Jessel, the previous governess who died and that she is after Flora. She tells her story to Mrs. Grose drawing her in more deeply into believing her crazy hallucinations and Mrs. Grose asks her if she is sure its Miss Jessel and the governess replies “Then ask Flora—she’s sure!” and then immediately comes back to say “no, for God’s sake don’t! She’ll say she isn’t—she’ll lie” ((James 30). She comes to the conclusion that the child will lie about it when there is no reason to suspect that she would. Again, this is her jumping to conclusions, because there is not any proof to say that the children have seen or know anything about the ghost’s. “Thus a very odd relationship develops between the governess and the children, for the more she loves them and pities them and desires to save them, the more she begins to suspect them of treachery, until at last she is convinced that they, in league with the ghosts, are ingeniously tormenting her’ (Bontly 726). “The ghosts appear, thus, when the governess is both aware of the corruption which threatens the children and convinced of her own power to preserve them untainted” (Aswell 53). It’s the governess fabricating all this up in her mind again so she can play the part of
horrible deed. Therefore, the elucidation is that Peter Quint must have corrupted miles. If Miles’
The death of Miles (presuming he is dead and not just unconscious) has a number of possible interpretations, too - he could have died from his fall, from Quint's extended hand or from some other cause. However, it omits the most important possibility as shown in the book, as a consequence of the removal of the strangulation subtleties; that of whether the governess herself killed him. Without this, the book's stunningly powerful ending, whereby the reader is left reeling from shock and subsequently disbelief (as the other possibilities come to the surface, such as the line "and his little heart, dispossessed, had stopped• is referring to an emotional heart rather than a physical one, and that the child is, in fact, still alive) is disappointingly absent. Whilst the žlm's ending is effective, it lacks the sheer power of the book's žnale. As with many book-to-žlm adaptions, a desire to change the ending is the žlm's
...t want to be the only one who does. It is another feeble attempt to prove her sanity to herself and to others. However, because she “is so easily carried away”, she soon believes that the children do in fact see the ghosts by reading into their every remark and behavior. By piecing all of this together, the governess proves to herself that she is not insane. The governess in The Turn of the Screw, is a highly unreliable narrator. From the beginning of the story, her energetic imagination is displayed to the reader. With this knowledge alone, it would not be irrational to conclude that she had imagined the appearances of Peter Quint and Miss Jessel. However, these facts in addition to her unsubstantiated inferences allow the reader to intelligently label the governess as an unreliable narrator. Works Cited Poupard, Dennis. “Henry James.” Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism: Volume 24. Ed. Paula Kepos. Detroit: Gale research.; 1990. 313-315.
“All The President’s Men” Quote Analysis In the movie “All The President’s Men”, Managing Editor Ben Bradlee tells Woodstein, “Nothing’s riding on this except the First Amendment of the Constitution, freedom of the press and maybe the future of the country.” This quote can be analyzed in a few ways. First of all, Bradlee is being sarcastic. The First Amendment, the freedom of the press, and the future of the country are all going to be affected if Woodward and Bernstein get the story wrong.
In the governess's last attempt to consume the children for herself, she sends Ms. Grose away with the sickly Flora and keeps Miles with her at Bly. After her last vision of Quint and with Miles dilapidated in her ineludable arms, the governess frightens Miles so that he collapses and dies, by the governess's conniving will, and to her own bane. Although the governess seemed to have good intentions, her root of mind was self-serving and deceptive.
In his 1948 essay, Robert Heilman explores the suggestion that The Turn of the Screw is a symbolic representation of the conflict between good and evil. Heilman interprets the apparitions of Peter Quint and Miss Jessel as evil forces. He explains that the ghosts only appear to the governess because evil lurks in subtlety before it strikes. It is the duty of the governess to "detect and ward off evil." She must protect the children from the awful ghosts. The governess describes Miles and Flora as beautiful little cherubs whose only fault is their gentleness (James, 18-19). Heilman views the children's beauty as a "symbol of the spiritual perfection of which man is capable." Heilman explains the ghosts' attempts to reach the children by explaining that evil forces will always try to conquer and possess the human soul. Heilman continues to draw from the descriptions of Miles and Flora to support his theories. He points out that the two children are described as having an "angelic beauty" and a "positive fragrance of purity" (James 9, 13). The governess describes them as if they are perfect and beautiful in every way. This repeated vision of beauty, radiance, and innocence parallels the image of Eden. The house at Bly also resembles this image, "I remember the lawn and the bright flowers..." (James 7). The governess makes mention of the "golden sky" and of Flora's "hair of gold," which Heilman believes connects Bly and Flora with these images of golden hues (James 7, 9).
...y the governess brings him up, but also to “all the rest.” These equivocal words refer to the initiation to sex by the governess, which is reinforced by Mile’s pointing out that she “knows what a boy wants!” After Mrs. Grose and Flora leave Bly, the two are once again alone, faced with a tyrannical and silent environment leaving the governess thinking they epitomize “some young couple…on their wedding night.”
The next unclear situation is when the Governess learns of Miles’ expulsion. This is one of the main mysteries within this story. The question, “What does it mean? The child’s dismissed his school,” is the only question that the reader has throughout the conversation between the Governess and Mrs. Grose (165). Even though their conversation does inform the reader that the school has “absolutely decline[d]” Miles, it doesn’t clarify what exactly he has done to be expelled (165). The Governess comments, “That he’s an injury to the others” and “to corrupt” are her own opinions as to why Miles was expelled (165, 166). Nevertheless, her comment does not help the reader in any way because the remark in and of itself is unclear. Her first comment suggests that Miles might be causing physical harm to other students but her second ...