Society in Self, Self in Society: Survival in The Wings of the Dove

Abstract

In the past, criticisms lauding or condemning Milly Theale, Kate Croy, Merton Densher, and Maud Lowder, or any combination of these characters in James's The Wings of the Dove (1902), generally assume that if one or several of these characters is or are the victimized, the others are the victimizers. The most common of interpretations claiming Milly's innocence/' for example, condemn Kate, Densher, and Maud Lowder of duplicity and mercenary intent, describing them, for example, as admirable villains (Syndy McMillen Conger). However, Susan Mizruchi, who sees Milly cultivat[ing] (234) her illness, Julie Olin-Ammentorp, who sees Milly's final bequest to Densher as profoundly manipulative (50), and Sharon Cameron, who contends that Milly performs the novel's ultimate manipulation (124), are among those who detect definite signs of intent on Milly's part and complicate, if not reverse, the view that Milly is merely the unconsciously innocent victim. Adeline R. Tintner's framing of James's text as his very free redoing (125) of Milton's twin epics casts Kate in the role of seductress who contributes to the fall and education of Densher. Milton Kornfeld (346) and Leo Bersani (142-43) essentially agree with this general position when they refer to Densher as redeemed villain. In this way, demonizing Kate resurrects Densher, who, more often than not, is then cast in the role of hero.