I absolutely loved this. There is quite a lot of controversy linked with this story, and what was really happening. Was their really evil? Was the Governess mad?

The end is rather inconclusive and leaves the reader to decide for themselves.

I thought it was very compelling and well written. James did a really good job of writing from a young woman’s perspective. Especially at the beginning I found her incredibly endearing and oh-so-GIRLY. Over a hundred years later, and it’s still quite current in terms of emotion. I thought.

He used great description and it was affective. Very ominous.

So, here is my take on the Governess. I don’t think she was nuts. I think that it was a Ghost Story. It was set up as such. James’ brother was a Psychologist that studied the paranormal. She went on to work with other children, the reader of the story knew her and loved her. She couldn’t have been completely bat shit crazy, as one of my professors calls her. She was a parson’s daughter, naive and young, very young. She became obsessed with the souls of these children, who had no one except her. She jumped to conclusions, she made assumptions and read so much into every single thing. But, isn’t that what we are doing now, sitting around analyzing everything James said? Does that make us insane? No. That is fairly normal human behaviour. As readers, we only have access to her side, because it’s HER story. That might leave us with some questions, but it only adds to the story, I thought.

LOVED it. I could go on for awhile, I think. But for anyone that hasn’t read, and dissected to a stupid extent, then it won’t make any sense at all.