One of the Internet’s most trusted medical sources, WebMD, reports that hallucinations, strong emotions, and excessive fear are three common symptoms of insanity. These symptoms appear in Henry James’s novel The Turn of the Screw. The governess often displays these signs, although some doubt her insanity. However, she is insane because her behaviors match the symptoms of insanity: she hallucinates about ghosts, she has strong feelings of love toward the uncle, and she has excessive fear regarding the ghosts.
The governess is insane because she is the only one who claims to have seen ghosts. No other character sees what the governess believes she sees. The governess admits herself that Mrs. Grose “had seen nothing, not the shadow of a shadow,
…show more content…
It is widely accepted in society that love often makes people behave strangely, and Douglas establishes early on in the novel that the governess loves the uncle. He explains to his audience that “[the governess] was in love” (James 3). His remark is significant because it shows that other people could tell the governess was in love. The fact that Douglas was able to deduce her feelings for the uncle shows that love affected her behavior. It may have affected her actions to the point of insanity. The governess does not interact much with her employer throughout the novel; however, the few interactions show that the governess has a distorted perception of reality. When the governess first meets the uncle, he presents her new job as a sort of favor. She relates that this “took her most of all and gave her the courage she afterward showed” (James 4). Most people would not react this way to such a statement. They would not be struck with admiration like the governess. Thus, love affects the governess’s perception of the world. This is one factor leading to her …show more content…
Grose actually does believe the governess. This may seem true at first; however, a deeper examination of the two women’s relationship reveals that Mrs. Grose occasionally pretends to believe the governess out of loyalty. Mrs. Grose is simply glad to have company after living in loneliness for so long. The governess attributes any of Mrs. Grose’s actions to “her being so glad to see [the governess]” (James 7). Mrs. Grose is naturally excited about finally having a friend. Thus, she is extremely loyal to the governess and does not want to upset her by completely disagreeing with her ghost theory. In addition, the governess has some degree of control over Mrs. Grose’s emotions. She claims that she “could keep [Mrs. Grose] comparatively calm” (James 59). There is a good chance that the governess influenced Mrs. Grose to believe in the ghosts. Mrs. Grose only claimed to believe due to peer pressure, not because she genuinely believed. Other people claim that the governess is sane because she cares about Miles and Flora. It is true that she loves them; however, this actually makes her more insane. She becomes overly obsessed with her charges, leading to hallucinations. For example, she herself admits that her love for Miles and Flora has placed her under a spell. The governess states that she “gave [herself] up to [this spell]” (James 19). Most people who care about children are sane. However, the governess is too obsessed with her charges’ angelic
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.
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
In the governess's insane pseudo-reality and through her chilling behavior, she managed to bring downfall to Flora and Miles, the children of Bly. With compulsively obsessive actions, irrational assumptions, and demented hallucinations, the governess perceived ghosts bearing evil intentions were attempting to corrupt and destroy the children she had taken the role of care for. In reality, the governess herself brought tragedy to the children through her own selfishness and insanity.
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
What if the governess never really saw the apparitions of Quint and Miss Jessel? The governess’ psychosis created the images of the pair from Mrs. Grose’s tales about them having something to protect the children from. After ‘seeing’ Quint and Miss Jessel late at night, she frequently visits the children’s rooms to check on them. Oftentimes when she visits the children, she lingers for a while.
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.
with Mrs. Grose, she learns that they are ghosts and former employees of the Gentleman
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
She believes she is actually protecting the children against an outside evil, which happens to coincide with her drive to demonstrate heroism and devotion to the master. According to Purdy, the governess conjures up ghosts because she invited them and willed them to come. Purdy feels the housekeeper plays her trump card and the governess' concern is not for the children but for all that would become of her, her bargain with the master, her relationship, and her passion for him. Purdy finds the following quotes to show her passion for the master and show that this serves as the motive of action.
The governess only hardly indicates that she is scared the ghosts will physically destroy or kill the children. In fact, Miles’s death comes as a surprise to us as readers. This is because we are unrehearsed in the book to think of the ghosts as a physical threat. Till she sends Flora away, the governess does not seem to consider removing the children from the ghosts. She even does not try to scare away the ghost from the house. Instead, the governess’s abilities focus on the ‘corruption’ of the children by the ghost. Before she could realize about quint, the governess thinks that Miles has been corrupting other kids. Although the word corruption is an understatement that permits the governess to remain unclear about what she means. The clear meaning of corruption in this text means exposure to information of sex. According to governess, the children’s exposure to knowledge of sex is a far more dangerous aspect than confronting the living dead or being killed. Therefore, her attempt to save the children is to find out what they know, to make them admit rather than to forecast what might happen to them in the future. Her fear of innoce...
One of the most critically discussed works in twentieth-century American literature, The Turn of the Screw has inspired a variety of critical interpretations since its publication in 1898. Until 1934, the book was considered a traditional ghost story. Edmund Wilson, however, soon challenged that view with his assertions that The Turn of the Screw is a psychological study of the unstable governess whose visions of ghosts are merely delusions. Wilson’s essay initiated a critical debate concerning the interpretation of the novel, which continues even today (Poupard 313). Speculation considering the truth of the events occurring in The Turn of the Screw depends greatly on the reader’s assessment of the reliability of the governess as a narrator. According to the “apparitionist” reader, the ghosts are real, the governess is reliable and of sound mind, and the children are corrupted by the ghosts. The “hallucinationist”, on the other hand, would claim the ghosts are illusions of the governess, who is an unreliable narrator, and possibly insane, and the children are not debased by the ghosts (Poupard 314). The purpose of this essay is to explore the “hallucinationist” view in order to support the assertion that the governess is an unreliable narrator. By examining the manner in which she guesses the unseen from the seen, traces the implication of things, and judges the whole piece by the pattern and so arrives at her conclusions, I will demonstrate that the governess is an unreliable narrator. From the beginning of The Turn of the Screw, the reader quickly becomes aware that the governess has an active imagination. Her very first night at Bly, for example, “[t]here had been a moment when [she] believed [she] recognized, faint and far, the cry of a child; there had been another when [she] found [herself] just consciously starting as at the passage, before [her] door, of a light footstep.” The governess herself acknowledges her active imagination in an early conversation with Mrs. Grose, when she discloses “how rather easily carried away” she is. Her need for visions and fantasies soon lead her to believe that apparitions are appearing to her. It is from this point on that she begins to guess the unseen from the seen, trace the implication of things, and judge the whole piece by the pattern. After the first appearance of Peter Quint, the governess begins to make infe...
Former U.S president Ronald Reagan was shot by a man named John Hinckley in the year 1981. The president along with many of his entourage survived the shooting despite the heavy infliction of internal and external injuries. The Hinckley case is a classic example of the 'not guilty by reason of insanity' case (NGRI). The criminal justice system under which all men and women are tried holds a concept called mens rea, a Latin phrase that means "state of mind". According to this concept, Hinckley committed his crime oblivious of the wrongfulness of his action. A mentally challenged person, including one with mental retardation, who cannot distinguish between right and wrong is protected and exempted by the court of law from being unfairly punished for his/her crime. (1)
... the Screw, it seems quite clear that the supernatural events the governess records were merely only real in her unstable mind and were the result of some internal issue. Her insanity drover her through a chain of assumptions and hallucinations. Nonetheless, the book altogether was very ambiguous. It is rare that one would find information explicitly confirmed or established. Because of the book’s obscurity, one can draw many conclusions and opinions about the book. From reading this book, the reader will find that establishing a right or wrong answer is unattainable. Although one may be able to support their theory thoroughly, it is ultimately based upon the matter of one’s interpretation. However, no matter how you interpret the story, the credibility of the governess’ narration, will still remain questionable due to the book‘s obscurity of events and dialogue.
In “The Madman,” Nietzsche describes a man going into a town, speaking about his beliefs, and being derided for doing so. However, with further analysis of several elements of the story, a deeper meaning behind the passage becomes clear. Nietzsche argues that morals cannot exist without God, and that atheists must therefore reject morality, and choose what is right and wrong for themselves. Nietzsche does this by using the character of the madman as a mouthpiece to express his own ideas. The first element of the parable that must be examined in order to understand the passage is a symbol, God, which represents morality in the story. The second element to be examined is the madman’s belief that humans have killed God. The implications of this