Jane K. Marshall
Readers of this unit may wonder at the outset why a project which concerns itself with British ghost stories culminates in a study of one of James’ novels. It is amusing to note that both British and American scholars claim James as their own. During my undergraduate years, I noted that his major works were included in American literature course syllabi. This summer I learned that professors at the University of London see James as part of a continuum of the developing twentieth century English literature. Curious, perhaps, but easily explained away. Though James was born in the United States, and at an early age was introduced to such friends of his father as Hawthorne and Emerson, he received much of his education abroad and finally became a naturalized citizen of England. Many of his novels are set in England, as is
The Turn of the Screw
. Certainly the novel has an English “feel”. However, the aforementioned is probably of interest only to me, and really is just as aside. I chose
The Turn of the Screw
because it is a suitable last step in this “introduction to reading” project which I hope will enable students to see literature as something approachable and worthwhile.
The first section of this unit attempted to engage students in the approachable, yet as it turns out, not simplistic oral tradition. The second section pointed out that the universal concerns or themes inherent in the oral ghost story are eventually developed through the particular genius of an individual writer. Individual is the key word here. With the individual’s touch comes a story of complexity, ambiguity, or mystery, if you will. It is precisely at this moment that things change. Suddenly interpretation is required. One also learns that interpretations may be various and dissimilar. Perhaps the validity of individual interpretation needs to be pointed out to students. It seems to me that what makes literature interesting is its demand for reaction and analysis. Presumably, reaction and analysis teach the reader something about the author, the world, and most important, himself.
So, how do we get students to play at this game? I mean this literally. Analysis can and perhaps should be viewed as a game or a puzzle whose reward is ultimately a sense of understanding or control of a situation. This leads me to think about developing some “warm-up” exercises for students which would in some way honestly portray this process and reasons for this process. But I will include this later as I am getting too far away from
The Turn of the Screw
at this point.
The Turn of the Screw
is the perfect culmination for this unit, for its interpretations are many and are extremely varied. Cases can be (and have been) made for all. What is most interesting from my point of view, after reading much criticism, is that while I can intellectually see the merit of nearly all of the interpretations, there is only one which I believe to be true. This colors my reading of the story as well as my view of its author. More importantly, it tells me something about myself for it fits in with my present view of the world. Yet, there’s a paradox at work here. In a sense, with my interpretation firmly intact, with my feeling being “this is the way things are”, I have resurrected a reaction that the old oral story sought to instill in its listeners. However, it should be noted here that the beauty of this “many-interpretations” story is that my interpretation is simply mine. My students may adopt entirely different views and should be encouraged to see the story as they see it.
It would perhaps be most useful at this point to provide teachers with a brief synopsis of the story as well as various interpretations of it as espoused by others. Ideas for teaching
The Turn of the Screw
will follow.