The Role of Narration in Daisy Miller

In Peter Brooks’ article “Reading the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative,” he argues “our lives are ceaselessly intertwined with narrative, with the stories that we tell and hear told… We live immersed in narrative, recounting and reassessing the meaning of our past actions…” (Brooks, 3).

In Henry James’ novella, Daisy Miller, narration plays an important role. Whereas in A Tale of Two Cities, the story is told by an all-knowing third-person narrator, in Daisy Miller, the story is told in third-person (objective), with bits and pieces of first-person narration. However, what I am really interested in are those moments of first-person perspective. Let’s take a look.

In the second paragraph of the novella, readers hear from, presumably, the narrator: “I hardly know whether it was the analogies or the differences that were uppermost in the mind of a young American, who, two or three years ago, sat in the garden of the ‘Trois Couronnes,’ looking about him, rather idly, at some of the graceful objects I have mentioned” (James, 4).

In this paragraph, we hear from a first-person narrator (perhaps Winterbourne or maybe not, as this passage seems to indicate that it is someone else) who speaks very casually, relaying the story of an event that took place years prior. However, something in the tone of the narrator’s voice suggests that we are not hearing this story as fact, but, rather, as hear-say that was picked up on the street. For instance, he is swift to point out that he “hardly [knows],” and that this event could have occurred “two or three years ago,” although no exact time is given. Much like the rest of the novel, the second paragraph helps to set an ambiguous tone. Should we believe what we are about to hear?

As a result, the novella is marked by subjectivity. Even though the story seems to focus on Daisy, we hardly know anything about the narrator, who is just as much involved in the course of events as Daisy (or so it seems). Therefore, is it safe to say that we can trust his/her judgement? After all, we never really hear about Daisy from anyone else – we only hear about her through the details that the narrator relates.

This begs the question, why did Henry James choose to write his story in such an ambiguous manner? Why not tell the story the same way that Charles Dickens chose to in A Tale of Two Cities (third-person omniscient)? When you take into account a common theme from the book – that is, the concept of Americans abroad – it becomes more apparent why James chose a third-person method of storytelling that is not all-knowing. By writing from the perspective of an observer (which is what it seems), he is trying to show the incompatibility of American values and British tradition (an American living in Europe).

Winterbourne may be an American, but he has lived most of his life in Switzerland, so one could argue that his actions and mentality have been “Europeanized.” Therefore, I will treat him as though he is European. From the beginning, Daisy’s attitude is considered wrong in the eyes of others, as her mannerisms conflict with the morals of European culture. For instance, Mrs. Costello, Winterbourne’s aunt, exclaims that Daisy Miller is a “dreadful girl” because she agrees to go on a trip with Winterbourne after only knowing him for half an hour (James, 19). Meanwhile, in chapter 4 at St. Peters, “a dozen of the American colonists in Rome came to talk to Mrs. Costello…” telling her that “poor little Miss Miller’s going really too far” (James, 54) because of her relationship with Mr. Giovanelli. Even these Americans have begun to understood the nature of European culture.

In these two scenes – of which others exist – Daisy is put into an unfavorable light, and much of that is achieved through the narration: that is, characters engaging in gossip about Daisy. However, what makes this interesting is that we really know nothing about any of the characters in which we are dealing. Therefore, it is difficult to accept any of these characters’ accounts as truth. Even more interesting, we do not really know if any of these characters are saying anything negative about Daisy – this is just what the narrator is saying. Nevertheless, maybe James wrote his story in this way to prove the stereotype surrounding Europeans’ views on Americans abroad – to show how Europeans feel about American traveling from the progressive New World to the proper, old-fashioned Old World?

In all, I think James is pointing at something important through his narration – something that we can apply to our lives today. While it may appear normal to take someone else’s word about another person, it is important to question how information is shared, and also the ways in which we process that same information. Because if we do not, we merely become engaged in the gossip ourselves, much like the characters are in Daisy Miller (or at least that’s what the narrator says).