In “Daisy Miller,” I found Frederick Winterbourne’s role as an observer fascinating, in that he not only acts as the conduit for the way we read the story, but also becomes a device that hones into the intricacies of social perception, misjudgment, and personal reflection.
Winterbourne’s observation exists between two perspectives: the American straightforwardness he was raised in and the European sophistication he has adopted. This makes him a critical yet often unreliable narrator, whose judgments and misunderstandings become a lens through which we view Daisy. and the text as a whole.
Throughout the work, he attempts to unravel Daisy, trying to figure out if she’s merely a naive American girl, or representative of something more rebellious and threatening to established social norms. His oscillation between these views reflects the broader theme of how difficult it is to truly understand someone’s character and motivations from the outside, a parallel with what the reader experiencesg. As an observer, Winterbourne’s perceptions are clouded by his own cultural biases and personal desires, illustrating the limitations and potential errors in judgment that can come from relying solely on external observation – and as readers, we similarly view her through his own biases and misunderstandings.
His role is also explored through the reactions of other characters and society at large. Daisy is constantly being watched and judged by those around her, which highlights how societal expectations and gossip can shape and even distort the perception of an individual. This collective observation contributes to the social pressures and isolation that Daisy faces, leading to her ultimate tragic fate.
Winterbourne’s final reflection on Daisy’s character and his possible misjudgment of her intentions underscores another critical aspect: his self-reflection. It is only after Daisy’s death that Winterbourne ponders whether he has misinterpreted her actions and intentions, prompting the reader to consider our own judgments and biases.
This exploration of the observer’s role in “Daisy Miller” serves as a poignant critique of the era’s social dynamics, highlighting the dangers of misinterpretation and the often overlooked depth of individual experience. It also invites readers to consider their own roles as observers in their social environments, the books we read, and the media we consume, challenging us to question how our perceptions are shaped and to what extent they are true to reality.
I find this point very interesting as well. It is obvious that Henry James invites the reader to question their original judgement of Daisy that was crafted by a jealous and un-reliable narrator, Winterbourne, who only seemed to want to view Daisy as he wished–as perfect, along with a great desire to control her. To view the whole story as one that challenges blunt perceptions of reality that do not acknowledge the complexities of human nature is an interesting perspective. I originally only read Winterbourne as a hypocritical man projecting his controlling tendencies onto Daisy, his love interest. This misconception further supports his characterization as a sexist man. It shows that perhaps people, due to the standards of etiquette, made snap judgements that weren’t always accurate and or fair. Clearly, Winterbourne did misread Daisy, who reveals her love to him upon her death bed, and as a result of his lack of critical thinking or compassion when interacting with Daisy, he must suffer a life without her. He acted judgmentally until her death and thus never had a chance to find love due to his critical, self-preserving manner.
To both of your points, I think Winterbourne’s mistake with Daisy seems to primarily illustrate the clash between American and European cultural norms. Winterbourne becomes infatuated with Daisy, but he hesitates to fully commit to her due to her perceived lack of propriety by European standards. It seems that in a lot of ways, Winterbourne’s mistake lies in his failure to understand and appreciate Daisy’s independent spirit and refusal to conform to societal expectations. Through Winterbourne’s mistake, I think James aims to critique the rigidity of European social conventions, and furthermore, to highlight the vitality and authenticity of American innocence and individualism.
I think a lot of the story almost feels like it’s being conducted by Frederick Winterbourne’s thoughts. He has a sense of American straightforwardness by also European sophistication which feels like how he switches between those two perspectives does a lot to alter the story, as we are seeing it through multiple lenses but it’s him who is choosing the way that he is narrating and his choice of telling a story straightforward or telling a story and trying to make it sound sophisticated changes the way a story can be understood completely. He becomes a device to try to unravel Daisy as a character but much of what we see him do is impacted by his bias and we see her through a limited judgment that he chooses. The way he can offer misinterpretations through his personal judgements makes him an unreliable narrator and gives him a lot of power over the story.
This is a really interesting point. It is fascinating how James reuses this premise of an American man in Europe observing a woman who he never seems to truly understand in “The Beast in the Jungle”. Marcher also spends a significant amount of time trying to see May’s mind, but he is never able to comprehend anything about her until after her death, mirroring Winterbournes’ revelation after Daisy’s death. These two stories both let the reader look through the eyes of a flawed observer, presenting interesting themes on biases and perceptions of truth.