So19: You have such a deep “feel” for the Victorian era. Does this come from your scholarly work, or were you introduced to period literature or culture as a younger person?
JH: It goes all the way back to my
childhood in Hobart , Tasmania . Hobart in the 1950s still felt like a
Victorian town: old stone warehouses, dank alleyways; some deliveries were
still done by horse and cart. There was a rivulet running through a dank,
rat-infested tunnel beneath the streets: a perfect place to imagine yourself
into the world of Oliver Twist, or
the Sherlock Holmes stories, which I read over and over, when not terrifying
myself to sleep with the ghost stories of M. R. James.
So I felt very much at home when I arrived inEngland as a postgraduate student
working on T. S. Eliot. Later on, I was drawn to write a biography of the
novelist Olivia Shakespear, who had moved to London in the 1880s and lived there all her
life. Reading hundreds of original letters and journals, tracing forgotten
figures of the 1890s through old street directories and public records, led me
deeper into that world.
In my novel, I wanted to
leave open the possibility that Georgina
really is deluded, as Dr. Straker insists in the opening scene, and to explore
the psychological consequences of that extreme uncertainty.
So I felt very much at home when I arrived in
A decade or so later, after I’d resigned from university teaching, finished
one unsatisfactory novel and abandoned another, I thought of writing a novel
based on Olivia Shakespear’s life. And then it came to me: why not make her a
writer of ghost stories? At which point Viola Hatherley appeared to me as a
fully-developed character. And, writing in her voice, I felt for the first time
that I was writing stories that no one else would have written, that were,
paradoxical as it sounds, truly and authentically my own.
So19: Why do you continue to be drawn to this period in your fiction?
JH: Partly because I know it so
well. But most of all, I think, because it’s distinct from the world I live in.
My ideal as a novelist is to become transparent to my material, a spirit
medium, as it were, through whom everything is relayed to the reader. I prefer
working with narrators who are quite different from me, which is why, perhaps,
so many of my narrators are young women. So the Victorian era, for my purposes,
is at just the right distance from ours. Everything—not just the décor, but
ways of thinking and feeling and communicating—has to be re-imagined, and yet
it’s close enough to our world that once you’re inside, there’s no loss of
immediacy.
The language, too, is subtler, in many ways, richer and more nuanced,
especially for rendering shades of feeling: Victorian English has a much larger
working vocabulary for emotion than we naturally employ. My version of it is
plainer and sparer than the stereotypical Victorian idiom, which we tend to
think of as pompous, ponderous and over-ornate. But many Victorian writers were
as eager to mock the stereotype as we are. Whenever I re-read the omniscient
chapters of Bleak House, I’m struck by how ‘modern’ they sound—and they
were written in the early 1850s, thirty years before the time at which The
Asylum is set.
So19: What do you think it is that makes this period in general, and the
Victorian Gothic in particular, so fascinating to contemporary readers?
JH: For some of the same reasons, I
suspect, as I’ve just given. When you enter a Victorian mystery, you step into
a darker, more menacing world, without any of the technological comforts—cell
phones, cars, electric light—that we take for granted. A world in which the
consequences of every decision—especially for women—can be far more momentous.
Once inside that isolated, crumbling mansion, you’re utterly alone with
whatever may be lurking there. Supernatural intrusions can seem far more
plausible. But it’s also a more elaborate, slower-paced society, and there’s a
fascination in seeing how characters deal with its constraints. So again I
think it’s that combination of near-familiarity and striking difference that
works so well.
So19: Like The Séance, this book’s structure uses a 19th-century
convention of juxtaposed documentary and epistolary narratives. What do you
feel this structure offers in comparison, say, to another Victorian convention,
that of the omniscient narrator?
JH: The great advantage of this
method—where everything has to come to us through a single consciousness, or
else through letters, journals and documents to which the narrator has
access—is that it heightens immediacy and suspense, and delivers a kind of
psychological realism that’s hard to maintain with an omniscient voice. Because
if you or I were plunged into a mystery where unknown forces were disrupting
our lives, and everything we thought we could rely on was called into question,
that’s the position we’d find ourselves in, not knowing who to trust, with only
our own instincts and perceptions to rely upon. But it can also be hugely
frustrating; the mechanics of getting vital information to the reader without
breaking the rules or doing something wildly implausible can drive you to
distraction.
Omniscient narration is ideal if you’re working on a large social canvas
(as in Middlemarch or Vanity Fair or the omniscient strand of Bleak
House). But for gothic mystery, a restricted point of view works best, I
think.
So19: The novel works so richly with the theme of identity. Its
opening variation on that issue is particularly terrifying: the idea of being
at the mercy of powers that refuse to believe that you’re “you.” It’s a
possibility that’s at once true to the period and quite contemporary in its
resonance.
JH: Yes,
identity theft is one of those themes that resonates very strongly between the
Victorian era and our own. Victorian novelists—Wilkie Collins in
particular—were fascinated by the fragility of identity. Your family history
determines your identity, your income, your possessions, and if that history is
lost or falsified or denied, then ‘you’ no longer exist. Ozias Midwinter in Armadale is an extended study of the
pathology, if you like, of having absolutely no way of telling who ‘you’ really
are.
So19: Victorian asylums are fascinating as both literal and
metaphorical reflections of female powerlessness in the Victorian era. Was the
asylum part of your vision for the book from the start?
JH: The
very first image that came to me—my stories seem to grow out strong visual
images that haunt me until I’m compelled to explore them further—was of a young
woman standing in an overgrown graveyard, confronting her own tombstone,
according to which she died when she was three days old. At the time I wasn’t even aware of its probable
inspiration—the great scene in The Woman in White where Walter Hartwright finds Laura Fairlie standing beside her
grave—because mine was a tranquil, daylight scene, with no sense of foreboding
until Georgina (as she became) discovered the tombstone with her name on
it. So the identity theme came first: if this is where Georgina
Ferrars is buried, I can’t be who I think I am. That led in turn to the
realization that it should be set in an asylum: the ultimate in powerlessness,
as you say.
So19: You mention the ghost stories of M.R. James, a wonderful
writer who is too little remembered today. What is it that you especially
liked, or like, about his work? Did his stories help inspire you to work with
the scary or supernatural in your own writing?
JH: In a word, restraint. MRJ was a
master of atmosphere: the dusty ecclesiastical settings, the slow, subtle
build-up in which you know something sinister is approaching, but you’re not
sure what until the final terrifying revelation, which often lasts only a few
seconds. He’s a superb descriptive writer
with a wonderful eye for detail. Yet he
also leaves as much as possible to the reader’s imagination.
I think restraint is almost a defining characteristic of the classic
English ghost story, of which MRJ was the finest exponent. But it was the other
James, Henry, who released the ultimate potential of the ghost story, by
transforming it into an equivocal, unstable form of psychological realism.
The Turn of the Screw is the most terrifying
supernatural story I’ve ever read, precisely because it’s irresolvably
ambiguous. Are the ghosts real, or is the governess mad…or both? It’s
impossible to decide. To claim, as recent critics tend to do, that the ghosts
exist only in her disordered mind doesn’t make them any the less powerful or
malignant; the child still dies. Brad Leithauser described the effect perfectly
in his New Yorker blog post on October 30, 2012: “You
can snap shut the cover of the book, much as you would close up a crypt, on the
tale of the unhinged governess and her ill-fated charges. But the crypt creaks
open again if she is not mad. When the completed book is once more on the
shelf, the more frightening interpretation is the one wherein some actual
supernatural agent is loose and walks among us.”
So19: Lightning and its electrical properties appear in The Séance,
and the powers of electricity play a role in The Asylum as well.
JH: My interest in archaic
electrical devices surfaces again. Victorian psychic theories drew heavily upon
electricity and magnetism, and the apparent links between these invisible
forces and the realm of mind and spirit: animal magnetism, mesmerism, telepathy
and so forth. By the 1880s, all sorts of electrical and magnetic treatments for
psychological disorders were in use. And
of course the dangers of some of the new technologies weren’t immediately
apparent. When the first X-ray machines went on display, they attracted huge
crowds. People were eager to put their hands and even their heads into the
machines. That first X-ray image of Anna Roentgen’s hand, with her wedding ring
starkly outlined against the finger bone, is as chilling today as it ever was.
So19: We hope you’re working on a new novel?
JH: Yes—another excursion in
Victorian gothic, pursuing my interest in strange and troubled perceptions,
hallucinations which may not necessarily be hallucinations, and more. To
be continued…<