Don't read this on a dark November night!!!

Last night, I wasn't in the mood to engage with my current buddy read. So, I decided to turn to this classic Kindle freebie. It was short, which I initially thought would make it the perfect bedtime story. How wrong I was!

This story was scarier than anything and seriously weird. At least five or six times, I literally had chills running down my back. And once I finished it, I couldn't sleep. I'm still not entirely sure what it was all about. However, I felt a bit better when I saw from reviews on Goodreads that hundreds and hundreds of professor-types have been dissecting this one for a century and still haven't figured it out.

I vote for the unreliable narrator theory. My guess is that the nanny is slowly going mad and infecting everyone around her. This includes the two beautiful, precocious, and imaginative children in her charge. They may or may not be a little evil, a little possessed, but by what? There are strange sexual/psychological undercurrents, brilliant yet fragmentary and ambiguous dialog, and vivid yet obscure imagery. Why did it matter that the man had no hat?

Do check out Traveller's wonderful review for all the various theories about what was going on at Bly! And Kim's excellent review for all the strange aspects of Henry James' writing that put me off a bit too (All those dashes!!). And thanks, Kim, for getting me to download and actually read this. It was my very first Henry James.

Okay, the sun is breaking on the horizon. I think it's safe to go back to bed :D

Content rating: PG for scary, maybe paranormal happenings.

A story that seems like James has passed through a sieve for every single word of it and which ultimately leads to this perfection. Don't expect the classic page-turner novel that so often ends up annoying me because it seems more like a script rather than literature. This doesn't mean it's not interesting or doesn't cause excitement. Overall, I would say it's a bit of both.

But hey kids, I have a dilemma. Is it possible to put a spoiler asterisk three paragraphs before the end;;;;;;; I avoided reading the introduction because I accidentally clicked on it and already learned it, and you're basically spoiling it for me in paragraph five;;;;; Put that analysis in some moderation.

Otherwise, it's an excellent book and there will soon be a series on Netflix for those who are interested.

(I got the edition from Psychogiou so I don't know if the same thing happens with the others. In the foreign language edition I have, this doesn't exist.)

\\n  Delectable Ambiguity\\n


The young, unnamed governess is in charge of two creepily perfect children. But is she losing her mind? Or are there really ghosts on the premises, appearing to and influencing the kiddies, and scaring her half to death? This is the see-saw you'll ride when you read this. There is no right answer. In fact, plenty of academics and others have argued both sides.

If you think you can read this book and "figure it out", forget it. It was written with artful cleverness, presenting the reader with an eternally blurry picture. The meaning will always be debated, and that's a good thing. It forces the reader to engage, analyze, and justify their position. Depending on your mood or what details stand out to you, your conviction may fluctuate.

I ploughed through Henry James' gothic novella. Despite some slightly confusing dialogue and awkward comma use, the book reads elegantly. It builds a swamp full of dread with every page. A mysterious employer who wants nothing to do with his oddly angelic niece and nephew? A child who can hear someone tip-toeing outside his closed door in the middle of the night? Apparitions of dead people? It's definitely a ghost story. Well, unless she was a raving lunatic...

I did not know that “The Turn Of The Screw” was published in 1898 until I obtained my copy. I have an aversion to horror but have a penchant for spirit stories. The title initially put me off as it sounded like a screw on a torture device. However, I later learned that it implies a double intensity of scariness. It is a reference to torture, not an actual action. Time can only represent each era, and thus I cannot fault authors for what they cannot change.

Nevertheless, this story would have had more impact if Henry James had not rambled on while introducing the story of his friend’s old nanny, emphasizing how frightening it was. One hundred years later, publicity promotes this as the pioneer of ghost or horror stories. I, however, consider it a mediocre ghost story, not the world’s best. It would be better to simply read about the lady’s adventure.

I must clarify the concept of ambiguity. The governess assumed she had seen intruders. She learned from her colleague that she had described the deceased. She had no knowledge of what they looked like and had never considered spirits. Perhaps readers confuse this with the synopsis, which questions whether the children were truthful about not seeing spirits. Flora is furious about being questioned, and we cannot determine how Miles felt. Since I don't believe spirits are harmful, the governess should have either gotten used to them or driven them out.

Free from today's genre-hyping and exaggerated parlour room preambles, this is a great journey in itself, with quality writing and an intriguing atmosphere. I was amazed by the elegance and novelty of the language, at least for me. I would like to introduce Henry to punctuation to divide his carelessly elongated sentences. Noticing that there was no plotting content, just lovely language and a great historic tableau for 2019, I initially planned to give three stars. However, a nonsensical and ambiguous ending reduced my appreciation to two stars.

Oddly enough, I had a rather pleasant experience with this turn-of-the-last-century ghost story. There was something within me that initially wanted to be worried. However, after perusing a number of rather... critical... reviews, I entered into this with certain expectations of some rather... dated... concepts.

Yes, indeed, the whole Victorian "you are what you wear" and "you are as you appear" concept can be particularly grating. And yet, despite the rather non-minimalist prose, which is quite common for that era, I found myself thoroughly enjoying being led astray by multiple red-herrings and preoccupations. I can even overlook our Governess's relative inexperience and ignorance regarding the completely batshit insane obsessions of a pair of tots.

Kids are truly remarkable at deceiving adults. Oh yeah, they are fantastic at it. Creepy little... ANYWAY!

I really enjoyed the ghost story, with its elements of possession, the preoccupation with letters, gossip, and afternoon delights. I didn't find it stuffy in the least. However, it's important to note that it's not much like a modern ghost story at all. It does have certain elements, to be sure, but it's very much a period piece. :)

Where's my SPOOKY?!
I was really hoping to get some good jump scares from a book that had possessed children in it. But guess what? While I was listening to this book, not even once did I experience the kind of horror I expected.
THIS:



I'm not sure why my teenage self thought The Turn of the Screw was worth 4 stars. But now, as an older person, I definitely don't think so. On the surface, it seems like it should be a great classic for me. It's short and supposed to be scary. But in reality, it was kind of crappy.

The story is about a governess who claims to be seeing the spirits of two people. One was the ex-governess, and the other was the rascally friend of her boss. And for some unknown reason, they've come for the children!



The kids won't admit to seeing these spirits, but the governess just knows they've been in contact with them. But why? I don't know. It's all very suspicious, but I just don't get it. All I do know is that the kids never actually did anything even slightly creepy.



Anyway, the governess enlists the help of the not-so-bright housekeeper. Together, they try to, um, pretend everything is okay or something. What kind of plan is that? It's not a good plan at all! The entire book was full of this kind of stuff. By the end of it, I was actually rooting for the ghosts to take the kids away so it would all be over.



Ugh. Either ghost stories have changed a lot, or this wasn't really a ghost story at all. It seems like the governess was just a delusional nutter. She fell in love with the kids' uncle after meeting him just once! And what was so great about him? He told her not to tell him if there was something wrong with his dead sibling's children. What a jerk!



Couple that with the fact that her not-so-bright sidekick never sees the ghosts, and I think this woman is more than likely some kind of crazy person. If you're looking for a scary story this October, you should definitely skip this one. I think you'd be better off stealing or sorting through your children's Halloween candy than reading this clunky mess.



Non-Crunchy Pantsless October Buddy Read
Because kids can be creepy little things...

Wow... that ending!!!

It was truly mind-blowing and left me with a plethora of thoughts racing through my mind. However, I'm fully aware that sharing those thoughts would be nothing short of spoilers.

If you have the courage and the eagerness to know all the juicy details and the spoilery thoughts that are currently swirling within me, then I highly recommend tuning into the Dark Academics liveshow.

There, I will be able to freely express and discuss all those aspects of the ending that have left me both stunned and deeply intrigued.

Don't miss out on this opportunity to delve deeper into the mysteries and revelations that lie within the story.

Tune in and let's explore the world of Dark Academics together!

Turn of the Screw is a truly captivating story. It centers around a governess who either valiantly endeavors to safeguard her two charges from malevolent ghosts or perilously loses her mind. James deliberately leaves it ambiguous, and I have a great affinity for that sort of narrative. Ambiguity truly appeals to me. I give the plot four stars. However, the ending is rather abrupt.

On the other hand, there is his writing style. I recall being at a party once where the topic was what one would do if the world was ending, and the general consensus was that we would engage in all the sex. James writes as if the world is ending and he has decided to use every single punctuation mark. Consider this entirely typical sentence:

I waited, but nothing came; then, in the first place - and there is something more dire in this, I feel, than in anything I have to relate - I was determined by a sense that, within a minute, all sounds from her had previously dropped; and, in the second, by the circumstance that, also within the minute, she had, in her play, turned her back to the water.

I don't even begin to understand what that sentence means. I haven't witnessed punctuation being misused to such an extent since Fanny Hill. James has employed so much punctuation that there was scarcely any other option but to use periods in this review.

To be quite frank, I have some rather strong feelings towards Henry James. His writing style, while perhaps intended to be profound, often leaves me feeling困惑 and frustrated. It seems as if he is more concerned with showing off his command of punctuation than with communicating his ideas clearly. However, I must admit that the ambiguity of the plot in Turn of the Screw does add an element of intrigue. It makes me wonder whether the governess is truly a hero or a madwoman. Despite my misgivings about his writing style, I can't deny that Henry James has a unique way of telling a story that keeps the reader engaged.

The oddest wording I can ever recall coming across in a book! It's truly astonishing. No one in real life would ever talk in such a convoluted and strange manner.

Moreover, the sentences are as long as a paragraph! It becomes nearly impossible to remember what was just stated. It's extremely frustrating and makes the reading experience a real chore.

There's no way I would waste any more precious time with this absolute snooze-fest. It's simply not worth the effort. I'm left wondering why the author chose to write in such a way that completely disengages the reader. It's a real pity, as the content might have had some potential if presented in a more accessible and engaging manner.

As an avid reader of horror stories and an author of a novel in this genre, I had this short novel on my to-read list for a long time. (By the way, that list just keeps growing and growing.) A governess is sent to a mansion in the English countryside to educate two siblings, two children who seem normal and healthy on the surface. However, as the narrative progresses, strange events accumulate, and we are faced with doubts and many things that are insinuated but never said.

"The Turn of the Screw" innovated in several technical aspects of the literature of its time, and its strength lies precisely in the ambiguity of the story. At the time of its publication in 1898, it was considered a ghost story and that was it. But it is remarkable that as the years pass, new interpretations emerge: based on Freudian psychology, feminism, Marxism, structuralism, and so on. Some highlight the theme of sexual repression (we cannot fail to mention that it was written during the very conservative Victorian period). Others highlight the theme of the end of childhood innocence. That is, "The Turn of the Screw" has entered the category of universal works that very few novels can boast, like Camus' "The Stranger" or Jackson's "The Haunting of Hill House."

James understood very well a pillar of horror literature: often, to make a story terrifying, it is more efficient to leave things unsaid. Because there is no universal idea of what the "thing" that is most terrifying should be. Some people fear death. Others fear loneliness. Others, professional or personal failure. Instead of pointing a finger at the monster in the story, it is better to leave things to the reader's interpretation, who will fill that void with their worst fears: their mind will do the work of torturing itself, instead of the author having to do it. Of course, this does not work for all stories or for all readers. Those who love stories with closed and very clear endings will hate "The Turn of the Screw."

**A Ghost Story or An Intense Psychological Study**

Blue & Black or Gold & White

This ghost story/novella, penned by Henry James and published in 1898, has sparked significant debate among writers, readers, and critics over the past hundred-plus years. The question at the heart of the debate is whether it is a ghost story or a character study. Truman Capote believes it to be a ghost story, while Edmund Wilson sees it as a character study. The interpretation largely hinges on whether one believes the unnamed female governess is mad. If she is, then it can be seen as a character study of a woman whose visions of ghosts are mere illusions caused by a bout of insanity due to suppressed hostilities. However, if one believes she has truly seen the ghosts of the former governess and valet, who were discharged for an illicit love affair and are attempting to contact and communicate with the ten-year-old boy and eight-year-old girl in her charge, then it is a ghostly tale possibly involving evil child molesters.

One can literally observe, almost paragraph by paragraph and chapter by chapter, how James was deliberately vague or ambiguous in writing this novella. As a critic for the New Yorker, Brad Leithauser, accurately commented, the book is "a modest monument to the bold pursuit of ambiguity," "rigorously committed to the lack of commitment." I prefer to view this as a ghost story, ambiguous in its portrayal, much like the existence of spirits from the netherworld. The intensity grows as James tightens the screws on both the governess and the reader.

If you haven't read it yet, I highly recommend it. At the very least, it will allow you to determine which side you come down on in what nearly seems like the literary equivalent of the internet buzz from a few years back: is the dress blue and black or gold and white?*

The Turn of the Screw, Henry James

The Turn of the Screw, originally published in 1898, is a novella by Henry James. It belongs to the Gothic and ghost story genres and first appeared in serial format in Collier's Weekly magazine from 27 January to 16 April 1898.

An unnamed narrator listens as Douglas, a friend, reads a manuscript written by a former governess whom Douglas knew and who is now deceased. The manuscript details how the young governess is hired by a man who has become responsible for his young nephew and niece after their parents' deaths. He mainly resides in London but also has a country house, Bly. He shows no interest in raising the children.

The story was first read on November 19, 1972. It was translated into Persian as "Tangle of Ahriman" by Ali Asghar Mehdi and published in Tehran by Amir Kabir, Franklin Publications in 1956, in 253 pages, with a bibliography in lowercase. The subject is American writers' stories in the 19th century.

This story was also translated into Persian as "The Twist of the Screw" and published in Sanandaj in 2006 under the title "The Turn of the Screw".

The narrator, who remains unnamed in the story, listens to the words of his friend, Douglas, who reads his former governess's writings to him. Douglas claims to have known her, but she is now dead. The writings are about the events of the young governess's employment by a man who takes on the guardianship of his niece and nephew (Miles and Flora) after their parents' deaths. He spends most of his time in London and has no desire to raise the children himself. Miles attends a boarding school, while his younger sister, Flora, lives in a village in Sussex and is cared for by a housekeeper named Mrs. Grose. The new governess's employer, the uncle of Miles and Flora, gives her complete control over the children and asks her not to bother him.

The date of dissemination was 04/06/1998 Hijri Shamsi; 04/12/2021 Hijri Shamsi; A. Sharbiani