Scan barcode
galaheadh's review against another edition
FINALLY i made it all the way through a Henry James
real review to follow on the weekend
real review to follow on the weekend
daja57's review against another edition
5.0
A literary tour de force. A classic ghost novella. A never-named governess goes to an old house to take charge of a little girl, Flora, and her older brother Miles, who has been expelled from school though no-one is quite sure why. The governess then starts seeing apparitions which she decides are the ghosts of valet Peter Quint and his paramour, the last governess Miss Jessel, who were considered by housekeeper Mrs Grose to have had too much influence on the children. But are the ghosts real or is the hysterical governess hallucinating? Are the children naughty or in league with devils? Why was Miles expelled (the governess tells us that the school say was was "an injury to others"; what does this mean?)? And have the children been damaged by their experiences of the ghosts when they were still alive?
The book is brilliantly written. Narrated by the governess, a classic early example of an unreliable narrator, the book is full of ambiguities that are never resolved. How, for example, did Quint and Jessel die? Miss Jessel dies while on a holiday (reading between the lines she is pregnant by Quint and dies having his baby but this is never stated). As for her lover: “Peter Quint was found ... stone dead on the road from the village: a catastrophe explained - superficially at least - by a visible wound to his head” and it is assumed he has, in liquor, slipped on the icy road but the words "superficially at least" allow the possibility that there is a more sinister interpretation
The governess is a hysterical character (although she is described as "a most charming person ... my sister’s governess ... the most agreeable person I’ve ever known in her position ... awfully clever and nice” in a frame narrative by someone who appears to have had a crush on her when he was a boy) who has immense mood swings. She is convinced that 'the master' has fallen in love with her at first sight, as she clearly has with him. One moment she believes that the children are paragons of innocent perfection and the next that they are in league with the devil. When she explains her self it is in long, convoluted and complex sentences in which words are used in unusual contexts (I wasn't quite sure is this was just Henry James whose prose style is sometimes fiendishly complicated). She repeatedly jumps to conclusions: “He was looking for little Miles ... But how do you know? ... I know, I know, I know!” (Ch 5). In dialogue she repeatedly interrupts her interlocutor and finishes their sentences for them (for example when the housekeeper, meaning Miles, says “Surely you don’t accuse him -” but before she can say what Miles shouldn't be accused of the governess says “Of carrying on an intercourse that he conceals from me?”), thus putting words into their mouth and so validating her own opinions, whilst leaving the reader uncertain as to what they wanted to say. (All dialogue is naturalistic, so that people rarely ever make definitive statements.)
But the ambiguity is the key to this book. It is crafted with incredible care such that the reader can never be certain of the truth. The text is full of hints and clues and suggestions, but nothing is ever certain. Nothing is resolved, even at the final, climactic ending. Brilliant!
The book is brilliantly written. Narrated by the governess, a classic early example of an unreliable narrator, the book is full of ambiguities that are never resolved. How, for example, did Quint and Jessel die? Miss Jessel dies while on a holiday (reading between the lines she is pregnant by Quint and dies having his baby but this is never stated). As for her lover: “Peter Quint was found ... stone dead on the road from the village: a catastrophe explained - superficially at least - by a visible wound to his head” and it is assumed he has, in liquor, slipped on the icy road but the words "superficially at least" allow the possibility that there is a more sinister interpretation
The governess is a hysterical character (although she is described as "a most charming person ... my sister’s governess ... the most agreeable person I’ve ever known in her position ... awfully clever and nice” in a frame narrative by someone who appears to have had a crush on her when he was a boy) who has immense mood swings. She is convinced that 'the master' has fallen in love with her at first sight, as she clearly has with him. One moment she believes that the children are paragons of innocent perfection and the next that they are in league with the devil. When she explains her self it is in long, convoluted and complex sentences in which words are used in unusual contexts (I wasn't quite sure is this was just Henry James whose prose style is sometimes fiendishly complicated). She repeatedly jumps to conclusions: “He was looking for little Miles ... But how do you know? ... I know, I know, I know!” (Ch 5). In dialogue she repeatedly interrupts her interlocutor and finishes their sentences for them (for example when the housekeeper, meaning Miles, says “Surely you don’t accuse him -” but before she can say what Miles shouldn't be accused of the governess says “Of carrying on an intercourse that he conceals from me?”), thus putting words into their mouth and so validating her own opinions, whilst leaving the reader uncertain as to what they wanted to say. (All dialogue is naturalistic, so that people rarely ever make definitive statements.)
But the ambiguity is the key to this book. It is crafted with incredible care such that the reader can never be certain of the truth. The text is full of hints and clues and suggestions, but nothing is ever certain. Nothing is resolved, even at the final, climactic ending. Brilliant!
pazfauxster's review against another edition
3.0
DNF.
The title story is so good, a sublime work of speculative fiction. However, I started losing interest soon after and didn’t finish the third and last story in the collection. The plots seemed almost repetitive and the convoluted language was unnerving me.
The title story is so good, a sublime work of speculative fiction. However, I started losing interest soon after and didn’t finish the third and last story in the collection. The plots seemed almost repetitive and the convoluted language was unnerving me.
emberreece's review against another edition
mysterious
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.25
This definitely was not my favorite, but it might be worth revisiting later, possibly to do a queer theory reading on Turn but it was mostly slow.
alineh's review against another edition
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0
jessicaw8's review against another edition
challenging
dark
tense
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.5
aimeesbookishlife's review against another edition
3.0
4 stars for the titular story, 3 stars for the others
pimmlet's review against another edition
2.0
Henry James shows that just because you can write a sentence that damn long, doesn’t mean you should actually write a sentence that long
bookishgoblin's review against another edition
1.0
This book was awful. Not scary, not exciting, barely readable, it's not often I tear into a book like this and I'm really not enjoying it, but this book is so dated and badly written that I just didn't care about the characters, the story, anything. Was she being haunted? Who on earth knows? Why did the kid just drop dead? Who on earth cares. This book was, in my opinion, pig shit. I am furious at being made to study it. I couldn't even read the three other stories in the collection.
heim_weh's review against another edition
4.0
3.5. The last story, The Jolly Corner, took me the longest to finish. It wouldn’t have taken this long had I been less distracted while reading this garrulous, long winded monologue of a story.
Merged review:
3.5. The last story, The Jolly Corner, took me the longest to finish. It wouldn’t have taken this long had I been less distracted while reading this garrulous, long winded monologue of a story.
Merged review:
3.5. The last story, The Jolly Corner, took me the longest to finish. It wouldn’t have taken this long had I been less distracted while reading this garrulous, long winded monologue of a story.