The Turn of the Screw by Henry James - 1 star

[Theresa]

I am so happy to have finished this! It was a reread, a plot well remembered, positive memories of many scenes and having read it long long ago. Even better are my memories of seeing 2 different productions of the Benjamin Britten chamber opera adapatation (1954), particularly the brilliant one by NYCOpera in 2013, the last performance before the company filed for bankruptcy and closed its doors (the company revived but barely and is no longer the formidible company it once was). I was excited to read this again, especially after reading Ruth Ware's retelling, The Turn of the Key. I should have left it to my memories.

The story is familiar: a governess is hired by the guardian of 2 orphan children to care for them at his country estate. She has one instruction: never under any circumstances to contact him about anything to do with the children. Being reasonably young without a lot of experience, charmed by this handsome youngish man who has taken on the responsibility of 2 orphans, and flattered by his belief in her ability to care for them on her own, she takes the job. She arrives to a beautiful country estate, in the sunshine, and meets Flora, a golden haired sweet, charming, beautiful child. Her brother Miles is away at school. It's all like a beautiful fairytale even down to the other staff. However darkness lurks ... and takes over upon the arrival for the summer holidays of Miles from school with a note saying that he's not welcome back because of his unspecified behavior. Now the fun really begins because soon it is apparent that the place is haunted and that specifically Flora and Miles are haunted and even possessed. Pure gothic horror ghost novella written for a late Victorian era audience.

I found the story incredibly painful to read- sentence structure, wordiness, and the immense waffling of the narrator - the unnamed governess telling in the first person -- take endless words and sentences to come to the point, sort of. Much of it of course was the narrator excusing and justifying herself. It also I'm sure was to create a deliberate ambiguity, letting the reader's imagination provide what is never said. I just found it irritating, tedious and not at all horrific (but then what real horrors in the world have I experienced), and just wished it would read faster. In a way, it encompasses all I dislike about Victorian era writing, though at the same time the author has provided images that have stuck with me forever, such as that perfect beautiful sunlit house set among gardens and flowers, occupied by happy servants and beautiful children -- all covering up a dark evil underneath, and of course the appearance and influence of the ghosts. I still have no clue why the ghosts are supposedly set on evil. However, lots of other potential themes rose to the surface this time, most importantly classism -- much is made of class differences here having me wonder - briefly - if James was using the ghosts and haunting as a commentary on the class system that found any relations between a lady and a menial as forbidden. The very ambiguity of so much in this narrative leave it wide open for inconclusory analysis of all kinds.

I'm really surprised at how much of a miss this was for me.

[NancyJ]

I liked one of his other books, so I was shocked by how poorly written this one is. I DNFed it very early. I think it must be famous because of all the adaptations. Other writers improved it.

[Theresa]

NancyJ wrote: "I liked one of his other books, so I was shocked by how poorly written this one is. I DNFed it very early. I think it must be famous because of all the adaptations. Other writers improved it."

It absolutely revolutionized the gothic horror novel - bringing realism to the plots -- as in the ghosts appear as they did in life, not wrapped in chains or rotted corpses, beauty and sunlight rather than darkness, gloom and rain.

I just read he was hired to write a serial ghost story for a magazine and this was the result. If I'd read the first installment I'd never have read more. I do think he wrote for his specific audience at the time: late victorian who were fascinated with the occult, ghosts, seances, and all kinds of spiritualism.

Still only gets 1 star from me. One needs a few of those now and then, real ones, to keep you honest in your ratings.