This novella seems really strange to me but I can't figure out why. If this story was written in 2014, people would be all over it, saying it's a great piece of feminist literature showing women outside of traditional gender roles before it was socially acceptable, which I can kind of get on board with. But it still doesn't make sense to me. We were asked to think of what we expected and what we are surprised by in Daisy Miller and here is what I've come up with so far. It's rough.
First, I'm honestly not surprised by the news that Daisy has a lot of Roman suitors. She knew Winterbourne for a few days and asked him to visit her in Rome, which to me foreshadowed her unabashed enthusiasm for new suitors. She even mentions that she's had quite a few men on her arm when she first talked about introducing gentlemen to her mother.
Speaking of her mother, I was surprised that Daisy made a big deal about her mother being overcritical of her male suitors. It made me do a double take when they were in Rome and her mother almost encourages her to keep bringing men around by continuing to leave them alone for extended periods of time.
I don't know what Winterborne sees in this girl. She is clearly stringing him along and almost showing off by talking about Giovanelli and Winterborne in the same sentence straight to Winterborne's face. What do you guys think Winterborne finds "delicately graceful" about Daisy? Is it her non-traditional way of acting around not just men but all people? She seems like she puts on a polite air but is really very blunt and obvious beneath her smile.
I also thought it was interesting when Daisy claims "Gracious me! I don't want to do anything improper!" when all along she has been acting like she can do whatever she wants and not care about the consequences of her actions. Then, when Mrs. Walker chases her down in a carriage, she states "If this is improper, Mrs. Walker, then I am all improper and you must give me up!" Daisy does not care what other people think about her. What do you think James is implying here? Is he portraying a scandalous girl who will get what is coming to her in the end? Or is he trying to show how a girl could act just like a man could at this time and somehow it's terribly improper. Is he pointing out the double standard or just giving the reader a warning?
After the argument between Winterborne and Mrs. Walker, why do you think Winterborne wants her to stop the carriage so he can rejoin Daisy and Giovanelli but instead turns and walks away? And why go to his aunt's house? Is it because he knows she was right all along? I would think going back to the person who hates this girl the most would be admitting defeat.
What does this all mean about the innocence of Daisy? What role do you think her innocence plays in her pursuit of suitors and her level of caring about her reputation?
So I am sort of taking the ideas posted here and building some of my own final thoughts on Daisy Miller from them, and the question around the character of Daisy is one that still has me thinking and although I agree as to that James in the text is certainly making fun of or ridiculing the Winterbourne character and the type of person he represents, Daisy stays a bit more ambiguous in how we view her. James seems to be doing a lot with Daisy, in regards to how innocent are we to really view her, how much of her actions are we to see as naïve or as just playing to a concept of naivety that would have been expected of women of the period, in juxtaposition with men like Winterbourne who are allowed to go out and live within the world, doing as they wish, while the Daisy’s and Mrs. Walker’s are expected to entertain and remain in the home.
ReplyDeleteI still like the idea though of the various “innocences” that Daisy embodies within the text as well, the various connotations around the word, especially within the time period and the idea of whether or not she lives up to those standards or ideas and whether or not that truly matters, as even at the end of the text, a sort of innocence seems to be maintained alone in the fact that she never had the chance to be with Winterbourne. An innocence which is strangely in my opinion tied in entirely with the American, which I am still not sure how I feel about, because although I understand the idea of history, as American is a much “younger” country and has seen a lot less wars and battle in regards to their European counterparts, but still the characterization of the innocent American is a little troubling to me for some reason as a binary.
So, I kind of have this strange theory behind the questions you've raised. I think that the story of Daisy Miller is told from the point of view of the woman that Winterbourne has in Geneva. I know this seems strange, but it explains a lot. It explains the ending line of the story about the clever foreign woman. It explains why the other woman is never described in detail, people very rarely describe themselves in narratives. It explains why the story is read as Daisy stringing Winterbourne along even though they have minimal interactions and it explains why there is no real explanation as to why Daisy acts the way she does. We have a story being told by someone who wasn't present during the actual proceedings and is only piecing things together from letters and what Winterbourne told her. This explains why nothing changes at the end of the story as well. This woman cannot see the changes in Winterbourne, he's hiding them from her, because who wants to let their lover know that the woman they were seeing behind their back changed them?
ReplyDeleteThat's such an interesting idea. I would have never thought of that. It definitely explains why there seems to be no change at the end of the text and Winterborne casually goes back to his other life and his other lady friend. The story being told from the "other woman's" perspective could also be the reason why there wasn't a lot of anything around Daisy's death. With the other woman telling the story, if she were in love with Winterborne she wouldn't care if Daisy dropped dead. If you look at it that way, it makes a lot of sense.
ReplyDelete